The Pit Challenge Tier & Relic 8 [MEGA]

Replies

  • I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    But if the raid cannot be cleared without the coordination, then it is forced (assuming you want to play the new content, which I believe is a design intent).
    All previous “required coordination” like your TW example is something which guild have decided to do for whatever reason.

    The problem pointed out with this particular raid is that guilds cannot decide whether or not to coordinate, they have to coordinate to beat the raid.
  • Kyno
    28358 posts Moderator
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    But if the raid cannot be cleared without the coordination, then it is forced (assuming you want to play the new content, which I believe is a design intent).
    All previous “required coordination” like your TW example is something which guild have decided to do for whatever reason.

    The problem pointed out with this particular raid is that guilds cannot decide whether or not to coordinate, they have to coordinate to beat the raid.

    But to what level, the mass attack option requiring everyone to do single attacks per phase can be broken up into smaller bursts.

    Also the level of coordination has a factor of the number of players involved. So requiring 50 to be on is different than say the 7 that have done it.

    I never said there is no coordination needed, but that some level of coordination has been required by guilds in the past when they have issues clearing content.

    I am not saying it's up to the same level, but honestly at times requiring 45-50 to be on in the same hour is probably harder than 15-20 needed to do a phase or 2 of the raid.

    Yes I understand that is a choice, and dismissing that as a guild problem is the same as saying international guilds have a guild problem. This is not the case and that is all I am saying.
  • Ravens1113 wrote: »
    I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar

    Which I am sure will lead us in ferociously. ;)
    In game name: Lucas Gregory - - - -"Whale blah grump poooop." - Ouchie

    In game guild: TNR Uprising
    I beat the REAL T7 Yoda (not the nerfed one) and did so before mods were there to help
    *This space left intentionally blank*
  • Kyno
    28358 posts Moderator
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    Now I'm curious. I've never been in a guild where coordination remotely near this level was required (practically, not technically) to clear content/earn rewards. What were guilds coordinating this much for in the past?

    TW was probably one of the worst I had seen. Mid level guilds with limited counters would need 25 people at a minimum to clear a zone to move on, if not or if someone tried to use too many other counters could ruin it for the guild in later zones. And yes this can be limited to an specific timeframe. Because you needed to get to the end zones and open things up to plan attacks.

    Again, I was not saying it was to the same level, but it was mass coordination that was required if the guild wanted to have a chance at a win.
  • Ravens1113
    3103 posts Member
    edited February 23
    Nikoms565 wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar

    Which I am sure will lead us in ferociously. ;)

    Duh? You know when. CG deserves shade I’m ready to lead the charge like William Wallace lololol.

  • Thanks Doja, you’re the best
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar

    Who are you and what have you done with Revans1113?!?!?!?!?

    You know there are times that I’m reasonable, when of course it’s warranted lol. Especially when what I’ve been asking for them to do for a month, they finally do lol. I told you I’d be ok with that. And we got news of conquest too so it’s a nice Tuesday lol
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    But if the raid cannot be cleared without the coordination, then it is forced (assuming you want to play the new content, which I believe is a design intent).
    All previous “required coordination” like your TW example is something which guild have decided to do for whatever reason.

    The problem pointed out with this particular raid is that guilds cannot decide whether or not to coordinate, they have to coordinate to beat the raid.

    But to what level, the mass attack option requiring everyone to do single attacks per phase can be broken up into smaller bursts.

    Also the level of coordination has a factor of the number of players involved. So requiring 50 to be on is different than say the 7 that have done it.

    I never said there is no coordination needed, but that some level of coordination has been required by guilds in the past when they have issues clearing content.

    I am not saying it's up to the same level, but honestly at times requiring 45-50 to be on in the same hour is probably harder than 15-20 needed to do a phase or 2 of the raid.

    Yes I understand that is a choice, and dismissing that as a guild problem is the same as saying international guilds have a guild problem. This is not the case and that is all I am saying.

    There are 4 levels to a TW, this means that to achieve what you describe above you can set 6 hour timeslots for each level and coordination is fixed.

    For challenge rancor you absolutely need to start runs at the same time (within minutes, or sit in airplane mode), this is completely different from what has been required in the past.

    I honestly don't see why you play this paralel between guilds choosing to set very short timeslots for TW (that is a guild choice and I will dismiss it as such) vs. content which cannot be beaten without coordinating within very short timeslots.
    I don't deny coordination improve TW performance, but again there is a vast difference both between "improve performance" and "cannot be done without" as well as the level of coordination required.
  • Kyno
    28358 posts Moderator
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    But if the raid cannot be cleared without the coordination, then it is forced (assuming you want to play the new content, which I believe is a design intent).
    All previous “required coordination” like your TW example is something which guild have decided to do for whatever reason.

    The problem pointed out with this particular raid is that guilds cannot decide whether or not to coordinate, they have to coordinate to beat the raid.

    But to what level, the mass attack option requiring everyone to do single attacks per phase can be broken up into smaller bursts.

    Also the level of coordination has a factor of the number of players involved. So requiring 50 to be on is different than say the 7 that have done it.

    I never said there is no coordination needed, but that some level of coordination has been required by guilds in the past when they have issues clearing content.

    I am not saying it's up to the same level, but honestly at times requiring 45-50 to be on in the same hour is probably harder than 15-20 needed to do a phase or 2 of the raid.

    Yes I understand that is a choice, and dismissing that as a guild problem is the same as saying international guilds have a guild problem. This is not the case and that is all I am saying.

    There are 4 levels to a TW, this means that to achieve what you describe above you can set 6 hour timeslots for each level and coordination is fixed.

    For challenge rancor you absolutely need to start runs at the same time (within minutes, or sit in airplane mode), this is completely different from what has been required in the past.

    I honestly don't see why you play this paralel between guilds choosing to set very short timeslots for TW (that is a guild choice and I will dismiss it as such) vs. content which cannot be beaten without coordinating within very short timeslots.
    I don't deny coordination improve TW performance, but again there is a vast difference both between "improve performance" and "cannot be done without" as well as the level of coordination required.

    no offense, but this is spoken by someone who has never been in a struggling guild.

    i never said this is exactly the same, but in a struggling guild a win or a loss can be the difference between having a guild or not right after.

    you do realize 6 hours doesn't work for everyone in a guild covering timezones, just like whats being discussed here. so saying its as simple as X is just like saying develop a deeper roster and do multiple waves of attacks to CRancor, or just get 7 people up to X level and then "its easier".

    we can agree to disagree, and as i said i'm not trying to say they are exact, but yes I have seen it happen where trying to get 30-50 people on in the same hour to do multiple attacks and plan the next period in the exact same fashion used for CRancor.

    but we know they are making a change so all of this is moot.
  • Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar

    Who are you and what have you done with Revans1113?!?!?!?!?

    You know there are times that I’m reasonable, when of course it’s warranted lol. Especially when what I’ve been asking for them to do for a month, they finally do lol. I told you I’d be ok with that. And we got news of conquest too so it’s a nice Tuesday lol

    Let those endorphins flow, my friend
  • Ravens1113 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    I know this is revolutionary for me to say, but now that Doja has confirmed changes are coming let’s wait and see what they’ll be. When the changes come, idk, but I’m sure Doja will update us soon.

    Now if they don’t change the stacking mechanic...yeah that’ll be cause for massive uproar

    Who are you and what have you done with Revans1113?!?!?!?!?

    You know there are times that I’m reasonable, when of course it’s warranted lol. Especially when what I’ve been asking for them to do for a month, they finally do lol. I told you I’d be ok with that. And we got news of conquest too so it’s a nice Tuesday lol

    Let those endorphins flow, my friend

    6r6v6j9kx0xq.jpeg
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Morgoth01 wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    Konju wrote: »
    Kyno wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    All raids were guild breakers.

    The damage threshold is poorly thought out, but that doesn't change the fact that new challenging content has always shuffled guilds up.

    Whilst there is some truth to that, the previous content shuffled guilds up because guilds had members who didn't have the roster or skill level to contribute. This is the first time content has been punitive for people who can't play the game at the same time as their guild mates.

    I have been in guilds that had timelines (windows where action was required)for both TW attacks and phases of the Sith raid. Yes, nothing like the exactness required here, but we lost members when each of those were implemented.

    The game never forced your guild to act in this way...your guild did. That’s on your guild, not the game.

    Very true, but there are many that I believe dont know or dont remember that there are many guilds out in position to do things they may not expect.

    In luls many mid range guilds may thrive due to big players looking to min max, and when new content hits they have to make it work or lose the ability to do that content or break apart.

    This happens each and every time, and it's not always about difficulty.

    This may not be the way the game is for some, but there are more different situations out there than many realize due to all the factors people list in this thread.

    There's a great quote from Scrubs that all these guild horror stories make me think of, "Statistics don't matter to the individual."

    Let's say 95% of guilds are seeing no serious issues besides the headache of coordinating damage. I'm either in one of those 95% or I'm in one of those 5%. If I'm in one of those 5%, knowing that it's not a problem for the other 95% doesn't help me.

    I agree that no matter what new guild content is released, no matter how hard CG tries to make it disrupt as few guilds as possible, someone is going to be negatively affected by it. So the response to these guild strife stories should not be, "Sorry, bro. That's what happens." The response should be, "Is this different than previous releases of new guild content? Or is your guild not a good fit for you anymore?"

    In the case of cPit, it could be either. I'm sure there are some guild that fall in that mid-range group you described, and they would have issues regardless of the coordination schtick. But this coordination mechanic is new. So it's fair to assume (and we know for a fact based on some posters here) that there are guilds being hurt by this, and it is different than previous releases of new guild content. In my opinion, the coordination required should have been 100% foreseeable (unless they were testing it with the stacking bugged, as has been opined by many here). So (some) people are justified in their outrage that this happened at all and that it has taken so long for CG to address it.

    So I'm not trying to open an argument (not speaking about you), but you seems to be highlighting my point.

    This isnt new, it may be new to the top 5% of guilds, but it's not new, and the game doesn't have a requirement of all players attacking in this fashion, this is the player based solution. This tactic has been used by guilds before, but it is dismissed as " a guild choice" and a "guild problem" not " a game problem". That same logic from the post I quoted could be used to say that international guilds have a "guild problem" and not "a game problem".

    Anyway this is all moot, as they are working on some change and we can all see how this rolls out.

    Kyno I don’t buy the “the game doesn’t require damage coordination” for crancor.
    Yes it can be done with a smaller part of the guild, but runs absolutely need to be coordinated.

    If you seriously claim otherwise, I challenge you to show how challenge rancor is to be beaten without coordinating runs.
    Especially in a fashion which can be done by more than the top 25 guilds.

    I was speaking technically, as there is nothing in game forcing this. Because saying this is new and thay any guild previously using this technique for other things is only technically a guild problem, it's an actual problem guilds face, not everyone is at the top end.

    But if the raid cannot be cleared without the coordination, then it is forced (assuming you want to play the new content, which I believe is a design intent).
    All previous “required coordination” like your TW example is something which guild have decided to do for whatever reason.

    The problem pointed out with this particular raid is that guilds cannot decide whether or not to coordinate, they have to coordinate to beat the raid.

    But to what level, the mass attack option requiring everyone to do single attacks per phase can be broken up into smaller bursts.

    Also the level of coordination has a factor of the number of players involved. So requiring 50 to be on is different than say the 7 that have done it.

    I never said there is no coordination needed, but that some level of coordination has been required by guilds in the past when they have issues clearing content.

    I am not saying it's up to the same level, but honestly at times requiring 45-50 to be on in the same hour is probably harder than 15-20 needed to do a phase or 2 of the raid.

    Yes I understand that is a choice, and dismissing that as a guild problem is the same as saying international guilds have a guild problem. This is not the case and that is all I am saying.

    There are 4 levels to a TW, this means that to achieve what you describe above you can set 6 hour timeslots for each level and coordination is fixed.

    For challenge rancor you absolutely need to start runs at the same time (within minutes, or sit in airplane mode), this is completely different from what has been required in the past.

    I honestly don't see why you play this paralel between guilds choosing to set very short timeslots for TW (that is a guild choice and I will dismiss it as such) vs. content which cannot be beaten without coordinating within very short timeslots.
    I don't deny coordination improve TW performance, but again there is a vast difference both between "improve performance" and "cannot be done without" as well as the level of coordination required.

    no offense, but this is spoken by someone who has never been in a struggling guild.

    i never said this is exactly the same, but in a struggling guild a win or a loss can be the difference between having a guild or not right after.

    you do realize 6 hours doesn't work for everyone in a guild covering timezones, just like whats being discussed here. so saying its as simple as X is just like saying develop a deeper roster and do multiple waves of attacks to CRancor, or just get 7 people up to X level and then "its easier".

    we can agree to disagree, and as i said i'm not trying to say they are exact, but yes I have seen it happen where trying to get 30-50 people on in the same hour to do multiple attacks and plan the next period in the exact same fashion used for CRancor.

    but we know they are making a change so all of this is moot.

    Apologies Kyno, your whole “this is similar to other levels of coordination” made me forget my actual point.

    You claimed above that it is player choice to coordinate runs for current version of rancor, what I gather from your last few posts is that you agree that claim was incorrect.
    Current version of rancor force coordination of runs of the raid is to be completed, and we seem to agree on this.
  • @CG_Doja_Fett I know you’re relaying the desire for rewards to be improved on our part so I had an idea, aside from the gear. If anything changes make the r8 magnifiers flatter. Make the minimum amount you get 5 for players and keep the max at 10. However if you say finish in the top 10, you get one of those second pieces needed for relic 8. If you get rank 3 you get 2 of them. If you get rank 2, you get 3. And rank 1 gets 4. That way it still gives incentive for people to compete for those top ranks and rewards accordingly but also takes away a big chunk of friction for those rewards when it comes to the relic materials
  • Kyno
    28358 posts Moderator
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    CG_Doja_Fett I know you’re relaying the desire for rewards to be improved on our part so I had an idea, aside from the gear. If anything changes make the r8 magnifiers flatter. Make the minimum amount you get 5 for players and keep the max at 10. However if you say finish in the top 10, you get one of those second pieces needed for relic 8. If you get rank 3 you get 2 of them. If you get rank 2, you get 3. And rank 1 gets 4. That way it still gives incentive for people to compete for those top ranks and rewards accordingly but also takes away a big chunk of friction for those rewards when it comes to the relic materials

    Not arguing with the plan, but the other pieces are "more stressful" on a players resources, I dont see how adding them in a very top heavy way would reduce friction. It seems like this would be equal or more friction as you make the other R8 material almost a "non issue".

    I'm all for more rewards and them looking at changes.
  • Kyno wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    CG_Doja_Fett I know you’re relaying the desire for rewards to be improved on our part so I had an idea, aside from the gear. If anything changes make the r8 magnifiers flatter. Make the minimum amount you get 5 for players and keep the max at 10. However if you say finish in the top 10, you get one of those second pieces needed for relic 8. If you get rank 3 you get 2 of them. If you get rank 2, you get 3. And rank 1 gets 4. That way it still gives incentive for people to compete for those top ranks and rewards accordingly but also takes away a big chunk of friction for those rewards when it comes to the relic materials

    Not arguing with the plan, but the other pieces are "more stressful" on a players resources, I dont see how adding them in a very top heavy way would reduce friction. It seems like this would be equal or more friction as you make the other R8 material almost a "non issue".

    I'm all for more rewards and them looking at changes.

    The gear as is, is pretty pathetic. If you’re giving someone on the top 10 one piece extra you’re in effect giving 12 pieces of g12 salavge. That’s not that much.

    I mean you could even make it 20-11 get one piece. Rank 10-4 get 2. Rank 2 and 3 get 3 pieces and rank 1 gets 4. Or something like that. You’re making one piece more available to all guild members but still rewarding top players for their contribution. It’s just an idea. Ideally you also get rid of the junk rewards or even make the rewards collections like TB given the coordination necessary but that’s probably too much of an overhaul for them
  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    Is there any prize box without junk rewards?
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • I think the Impulse Detector issue could also be fixed by having the cPit drop G12 pieces that can be scavenged into Impulse Detectors instead of Electriums (of which I already had more junk gear income to salvage than I would likely exceed anytime soon)
  • TVF wrote: »
    Is there any prize box without junk rewards?

    There’s not a single raid prior to cranky with G5 gear pieces. That’s the worst gear drop of any raid.
  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Is there any prize box without junk rewards?

    There’s not a single raid prior to cranky with G5 gear pieces. That’s the worst gear drop of any raid.

    Effectively irrelevant if it's G5 or mk4 holo salvage, but you do you.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    Ravens1113 wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    Is there any prize box without junk rewards?

    There’s not a single raid prior to cranky with G5 gear pieces. That’s the worst gear drop of any raid.

    Effectively irrelevant if it's G5 or mk4 holo salvage, but you do you.

    Mk4 holo lens’ still serve a better purpose than G5 gear pieces.

    But either of those pieces have no place in this prize box. The relic gate, difficulty, etc all denote a need for far better gear rewards in the boxes.
  • Sewpot
    1588 posts Member
    36z8qp0wn5x1.jpeg
    This was yesterday
  • Sewpot wrote: »
    36z8qp0wn5x1.jpeg
    This was yesterday

    Oooof
  • Issue:

    The Crancor raid has made it important not only to coordinate (forcing people to be at the same time or spend long time not playing the game -ie. airplane more-). This has been debated a lot so I am leaving that point at that. Let us assume that the guild coordination thing is something the devs actually want. My main issue is that a single mistake, while trying to do your best to coordinate, meaning, someone posting out of order or forgetting to set airplane mode will derail the weekly event for a whole guild.

    Idea:

    Make it so that guild officers can restart a portion of the raid (reset crancor to P1 status, or P2 status, etc.)
    Mechanics:
    - The phase is effectively reset for everyone. Any ongoing attack is aborted and those characters are allowed to be used again (people holding damage, people who already started the attack on that phase but have not finished, etc)
    - Any damage already posted and any team already used is not usable again, even if it was used during that Part that was just reset. Any final posting of damage is set to null, zero, nada.
    - I would not mind if the damage posted was subtracted from the player(s) who already posted during that part, but that might require more tracking that is not already there, so would unnecessarily complicate implementation, of course this could lead to a potential issue of players being able to post higher scores by resetting a part of the raid. In practice though, this affects no one outside the guild and if abused then people can simply choose different officers or a different guild.
  • All I’ll say is the raid mechanics are completely antithetical to any player/guild quality of life updates. Airplane mode for a half hour or so isn’t fun while I check discord on another device isn’t fun. I like the challenge, but the mechanic is just bad design. At least HSTR you just got your butt kicked, but you could see progression, this is just another attempt by the devs to see how far they can go to get die hard Star Wars fans to rage quit a game they’ve been playing for years. :'( Not fun
  • Seriously?

    We can cope with the insane lack of life quality this raid brings to guilds. We can deal with internal conflicts this raid provoques with colleagues you played with for more than 4 years. You can also understand people quitting from the game. It’s life. Some leave and some stay.

    But you CGs better look at what you give to players after all the mess you created with this Pit challenge. It is worthless wasting an hour of 25 people for something like this. I have had better bronzium packages.

    ij0q3qm667rb.jpeg
  • TVF
    27500 posts Member
    Can't get R8 mats in a bronzium.
    The CGDF is recruiting. Say hi in our Discord! https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
Sign In or Register to comment.