Re-tuned HAs

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Galien, Jan 17, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Corwyhn Lionheart Guild Leader, Lions of the Heart

    I think the mention of a "comfort zone" is important. A lot of people who work all day come home stressed and grumpy just want to exp for a couple hours in their "comfort zone". When the weekend or a few days off come around they try the harder stuff. I get this. I waver between doing harder stuff to sometimes playing with fluff content just for fun. If I have spent 4 hours working on a project I want to come in eq and just relax a bit.

    Or I want to be able to enjoy RL and game at the same time. An EQ expansion that has two T1 zones and then one of them has a very irritating and anti RL mechanic is a very bad idea.

    I get some raiders or other hard core players can spend hours at a time just grinding away non stop and never concentrating on anything but the game. Good for them. For myself, and I am guessing the vast majority of eq players, we actually play the game AND do RL things too.

    I really don't get how some people feel the need to chain players to their desk. I am not asking to AFK and kill and exp while I am afk. I just want to be able to walk away without worrying about being attacked. This is what has kept me playing EQ and running a casual guild for 19 years. If the game devs are going to start punishing players who won't sit at the computer non stop for hours then it may be time for me to find something else to do. Fix the HAs and remove the irritating any afk mechanics.

    When I have time to be at the computer non stop I will do open raids or group with someone. When I box I want to be able to afk or just sit there and chat with people. Stop and handle some guild business without having to leave a zone or go away out of my way to find a safe spot.

    Listen to the people who have no RL to take them away from the computer and you will see the game shut down faster. Forcing people to be at the keyboard and playing non stop isnt a game winner.
  2. Yinla Ye Ol' Dragon

    If they went with something like this they need to remove the need to do HAs 6 times in TBM or make those 4 HAs exempt from EXP decline.
    Gyurika Godofwar likes this.
  3. Yinla Ye Ol' Dragon

    The problem is the longer there is no communication the more irate customers get as they think their concerns are not being listened to.

    EQ players are very passionate about the game they play, if they weren't they wouldn't get so upset over changes and things being broken. The day the players stop getting upset is the day no one cares what happens to EQ.
    Caell and Gyurika Godofwar like this.
  4. Balthen Lorekeeper

    I'm unfamiliar with what you are discussing. I came back about a year ago from a 7 year break and have been slowing grinding my way thru the expansions and I'm currently up to TDS. However it doesn't seem like a hard problem to address. On these missions make it where the diminishing returns do not start till the 7 time you do the mission.
  5. E'ci - Knight Errant Journeyman

    In order for the unspecified proposed "tweak" to be successful it clearly should meet the following two criteria:

    1. "They are designed for groups of 2-3 players and their mercenaries, and shouldn't take an average group any longer than 45-60 minutes to complete." needs to be true.
    2. These become easier to complete as one progresses, not harder.

    If it doesn't conform to the former it is a nerf to the ability of persons to complete these missions.

    If it doesn't conform to the latter it is indefensibly poor game design. If its a Level 100 mission with Level 100 loot, it absolutely should be easier at 105 and even easier at 110.
    Caell and Mordeen like this.
  6. Oakenblade Former ForumQuest Champion

    So many expert opinions. Reading the comments in this thread is such an excellent use of my time while on the toilet at work.
  7. enclee Augur

    The people calling for an exp nerf to HAs are ridiculous, from the posts people were getting 30-40 AAs from a lesson burn and then significantly more elsewhere. HAs are on 6 hour lockout, stop trying to take rewards away from content to make it not worthwhile. Each expansion generates less content each year, so I can see the value in a mission that has automatic variable difficulty. The devs just need to figure out 3 issues:

    1) Don’t block progression for returning players after a level increase (select a level range or add difficulty mods via zone debuffs)
    2) Proper tuning for 2-3 group geared players
    3) Updated rewards

    Just because content is level appropriate doesn’t mean it’s desired to be replayed.
    Gyurika Godofwar likes this.
  8. Corwyhn Lionheart Guild Leader, Lions of the Heart

    If they completely rolled back the HA changes I wouldnt be against a 10% reduction in exp. That being said I think it is a good idea to have a relatively easy and quick exp missions that can be done once an evening by those who work all day and don't spend 12 hours a day tied to the computer screen.
    Caell, Gyurika Godofwar and Mordeen like this.
  9. enclee Augur

    They’re not reverting it back, as much as I am against this change they need to perfect the HA concept if they want to maximize player retention.
  10. Corwyhn Lionheart Guild Leader, Lions of the Heart

    I know they arent reverting it back but at this point we don't know how they will be retuning things.
  11. smash Augur

    But they also need to change the 2 entry zones in ROS to attract people going to ROS.

    Reduce the dots and such on trash mobs in OT by 50%, make them cureable.

    Ŕeduce the number of flying drakes in skyfire to 8 in total. Make artifical splitting of the zone into 4 quadrant, and there can only be 2 in each quadrant. You should never get more than that. As of today i have had 4+ in a row.

    We all make mistakes, devs were listening too much to people wanting hard zones. Its ok there is 1 hard zone, but it should not be entry zones, but the end zone (VP), which strangely feels like the easier zone, once you done faction.
  12. Millianna Augur

    RoS is a lost cause
    Corwyhn Lionheart likes this.
  13. yepmetoo Abazzagorath

    RoS is fine. Stop muddying the issue. Whining about everything just distracts from the problem and makes the devs (and everyone else) ignore you.
    Niskin likes this.
  14. Millianna Augur

    Everyone uses the three words: Rip off Scam in general chat.
    wingz-83 and Corwyhn Lionheart like this.
  15. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    Since this topic has spawned quite a few threads, there are a lot to cover.
    According to the staff post tracker, only Roxxlyy posted in either this thread or the HA-scaling one, and these were basically "be patient" posts.
    The post by Prathun you mention was probably this one (not too much of a bother to find with the help of the same staff post tracker) in which he indeed mentions an "unproductive tenor".
    I am not agreeing with either the observation nor with the consequence, but the "we are looking into potential options" was a start.

    As Yinla has posted though, this "looking into options" is a problem in itself, based on past experiences.
    We are faced with a definite issue (for some people more than others, as always) and i find it natural that emotions run high when such things happen. Therefore the information-policy is so important imo.
    An explanation goes a long way to calm people down and bring them back to "reasonalbe" postings and discussions, while letting people guess and speculate only brings them higher up on the fence.
    The longer we hear nothing, the worse it gets - and as you say, the silence immediately following the patch was the worst part, as it only fueled the uncertainty.

    I appreciate especially Prathuns' postings on things - they generally help for the understanding of things (even if i burst into laughter sometimes at the "backwards" tech/methods employed even for 1990's game). Understanding creates sympathy and a baseline for a discussion - and understanding is what's lacking. We - i at least - do not understand the "why" behind this change to HA scaling in the first place, we didn't think there was something amiss as it fit into the picture we had of decaying content and all.
    Nor do we know about the overall goal of this change.

    As a Developer yourself, you know the importance of "user acceptance". And i think EQ users (i.e. players, subscribers - the customers) have been VERY patient.
    Summarily, whether we like the HA change as Wulfghar seems to or not as i do, we like this game. It's part of our history and i would guess most of us would want it to be a part of our future as well.
    We've suffered not only the retune, and an expansion (some even say several) one could (and i do, for RoS) claim to be only half- (and that's not to downplay each individual's contribution, but about the whole thing as a "product" ). But we ALSO suffered chat-lag (starting on AB, and in an effort perhaps to minimize it for us, "spread over" to other servers, drawing wider circles too) for over a year for example, with similar silence. and other issues (like more nerfs to many classes only to find us "rebuying" half of what's been taken away later in the new expansion).
    We are also not kept informed about on-going changes - are they even ongoing, or do we have to live with the lag-spikes from 1s to 30s now?
    As i said, uncertainty - and disappointed customers, burnt children.


    That is exactly the problem we're having, e.g. with the cactus mission Yinla mentioned.
    We are "told" something when it's about to be released, via a patch note.
    That means of course that "some plan" has not only already been set in motion but is nearing completion. More of the "eat or die" thing. And most likely more delay as the "fix" is fixed if you know what i mean. Otherwise, there's silence. No "we're still at it" no "we tried this and that but it did not work" no "we discussed this and dismissed it because..". And right now with the last few sentences i am only talking about the chat-lag issue, but the pattern is a persistent one.
    Hasn't there been enough of that already, over say the last year and a half?
    Isn't it therefore time for a different approach?
    I think it's high time!

    That's why i said, very early on, that (for ME) nothing but a taking back of whatever's caused this will do. To fall back to a situation people felt comfortable in. And THEN we can forward from there again, in a more constructive manner by talking about the goal and the methods to reach those goals.
    Before some "plan" is put into motion and some switch was changed to set the train off into the "wrong" direction. Because it's hard to stop a running train as we who watched "The Taking Of Peltham One Two Three" know, and noone likes the feeling of being taken "hostage" for the ride like in that movie.
    Gyurika Godofwar, Feznik and Mordeen like this.
  16. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    Again, the XP issue being brought into play *sigh*
    You speak of good/great rewards, yet all you can possibly mean is the experience since loot has not been changed and the currency is all but worthless save for a few (caster)augments.
    And if you care to go back, i have pointed out how experience wasn't "that great" after all, even in Gribbles.
    And you are, once again, ignoring the scope/impact of this change as so many do.
    As to "the intent": The amount of AAs per Gribble completion was certainly their intent - simply because it hasn't changed over the years since inception.
    IF - and once more, that's a big if - XP would've been an issue, then XP would've been adjusted not the mob's levels/abilites/HPs/DPS.
    I hope that makes sense to you.

    "easier" is not the question. "back to the difficulty they had" is.
    Once more, XP is a separate issue - if Dev's think (i don't) that XP were an issue, then adjust that XP.
    Or whatever.
    But comparing this to LGuk does not work, because LGuk is grey and HAs per definition aren't.
    So if you touch the XP, setting it to zero is a no-go too.

    Again, this is just another pseudo-argument.
    Simply because "avoid/bypass current content" isn't something new, it's the norm.
    Think back to the release of GoD, as an extreme example:
    If everyone had been forced to go there, by invalidating the LDoNs, the Ykesha zones, planes of power and even Luclin and higher Antonnica zones... do you actually think we'd have "lived" to see Omens of War?
    I was around at the time, i spent ALL my time during GoD in LDoNs and Ykesha and raiding PoP.
    Because i stuck my nose in, got bleeded, decided my gear was not good enough (noone's was at the time, and i was but a year-behind grouper at the time too) and did the "fall-back-scenario" of XPing elsewhere. And the same thing happened with the release of OoW btw - stuck my nose in, got bleeded, decided to go selsewhere. And i had BEATEN OoW before i actually went back to GoD to do the progression (as a RL, triggering stuff) or get some Qvic loot for friends there.
    With RoS we see the same thing and the same reaction by some (though not in the extent as in GoD which was ill-received even by raiders which isn't as much the cause with RoS).
    Why exactly do you think that XPing in previous expansions is a problem?
    Because eventually both you and i know that people will get into RoS - when they feel "ready for it".
    Vexana_Lanys and Mordeen like this.
  17. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    erm... Now you are failing to start making sense to me!
    On your points there:
    a) "major changes to gameplay" - i don't know how major the change was or not, i just see the major EFFECT of said changes, that sure change gameplay - at least the "where and what" if not the "how" as well.
    b) progression is indeed the major gripe, but it DOES go beyond that too.
    Even if all progression-related (i.e. partisan) tasks were set back to the difficulty they had, we still have the issue of HAs (read: mercenary tasks) for completing the EXPANSION. Same problem, slightly different impact, but still enough of an impact to be wary about such "opponinos" as your voiced one.
    c) referring to getting level 103 spells while doing TBM missions if a fail.
    TBM missions are meant to give level 103 spells, aren't they?
    And even if you were referring to level "101+ loot" while doing the same HA (lesser spirit or into the temple i reckon) at, say, level 85 max well then it's at most a "bug" or (as i said) design failure because loot hasn't been downscaled along with the levels. Let's call it an oversight perhaps, since all chest loot in TBM was the base level75 item anyways, except for the spellgems you mention.
    However, even if getting the spell were not intended, then that situation is hardly fit to explain the "fix" to HA scaling - or do you fix a squeaking door with the hammer?

    Glad we agree there!

    It's not "Chicken Little", it's Steward Little, please! ;)
    But otherwise:
    If you look back a few pages, i agree with you, to some extent and I have outlined a similar possible effect or use several pages back.
    I see the potential of HAs or a similar mechanic, to provide "lasting" content for ever-shrinking expansions, yes. Which is one point why i think the "XP issue" is invalid as it's brought up too.
    And i'd like to hypothesize about that with you and others, but i feel this is not the place.
    Nor is there a reason to even go that route, as - like i keep saying - we lack the communication and a stated intent for a basis of such a discussion.
    We just do not know what is "behind" this "fix" as we see it, so all further speculation is derailing and moot.

    And if Dev's WERE ready to go that route, then i'd wish for a discussion initiated by them (because i regard all player-started "wish lists" as kind of moot and too general) and also monitored and feedback'd to (like in terms of "we have these constraints" or "this is a nice idea but has been dismissed as not cost effective" or some such that allows us to discuss on an eye-to-eye level. Well, at least those of us that don't just have user- but also some professional background - and there's bound to be many from many involved specializations, given our age meanwhile).
    As well as "well ahead" of the time - e.g. in the planning state for an expansion, not the testing stage.
    I know this isn't an open-source or a community project - but the more you involve your community, the better for it's cohesion, see "Elite: Dangerous" for example.
  18. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    That depends on the intent.
    If it were just an "alibi thing", a show of listening to the customers/playerbase, then shortly before testing would do i guess.
    If however the intent were to actually make allowances for the feedback received to also be actually considered/implemented, then a time when implementation has already started would be way too late.
  19. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    I doubt it scaled at all.
    At least since my return, the XP has been fixed. My guild mates reported it had been fixed.
    So my assumption is (i wasn't there for the release of CotH) the rewards - per mission - has always been fixed.
    I saw "adjustments" by bonus tasks and bonus-XP weekends and such, but never of the base-mission reward.
    If, over the years, the "overpowering" were to result in an out-of whack difficulty vs XP relation, then the simplest and least impacting fix (which would cause some players to ragepost nonetheless ofc) were to "fix" the XP side - e.g. by adding scaling rewards too instead of just the mob's levels.

    agreed
  20. Zhaunil_AB Augur

    I don't actually agree with the latter but i can let this stand as a whole for a valid enough observation of what we have now.

    agree and agree.

    Agreed to the "scaling within era"; as i said before, i did not even care if a mob was db or white or yellow to me - instead i cared about the "power level" and that mine increased in relation to the mob's over time. In the past, it did. now, i doesn't seem to anymore. that's what needs to be taken back, completely.
    RoS to CotF is not a question, as RoS does not even have HAs.
    If it had any however, then the scaling DOWN would have to find it's own "power level" for an RoS HA at level 75, and compare that to a TBM one at level 75 too (as in: some expnasion scaling would be "ok", but if offered for lvl75's it should also still be beatable for level 75's, which limits the scaling in itself over time/expansions). So i think there's nothing to object to when talking RoS scaling to CotF for scaled DOWN stuff.
    IF however, one could actually set the scaling upon request (reuse of the LDoN window despite a different method of implementation or a similar one for example), then BOTH sides - the mob levels AND the rewards could be "scaled" and, more importantly, seen right from the start. AND it could also scale the loot - even upwards.

    So you speculate.
    Because we're still missing any indication on the "why" in the first place.
    But supposed you were speculating correctly here, then this would be a prime example of how NOT to do it, of how involving your community sooner would've benefitted the whole (i.e. Devs and players alike).
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.