Raiding doesn't have to suck.

[QuantumWire]

I, for one, really enjoy raiding. It's just nice to see 40 people working together effectively to overcome an overpowering foe. Of course, you would probably have to be in a guild to organize such an event. And I can imagine that this could lead to the formation of static "raiding teams" and an exclusion of casual gamers (on the other hand, my guild in WoW implemented a system, where people who took part in less raids got preference for the available raids slots, so that a casual gamer was likely to be able to join a raid on that one day in the week/month he wanted to).

So once more: I think raiding is really nice, just for the spectacle of bringing down some boss in a concerted effort. Additional incentives (lewt!) could be evenly distributed to all raiders, or be immaterial: A bonus to the fame of the guild/player, double XP for a while, nice new furniture for the guild hall/personal houses (pretty material, but doesn't really help in most fights), ...

 

[crisisfox]

Originally posted by QuantumWire@Jun 15 2006, 11:47 AM
I, for one, really enjoy raiding. It's just nice to see 40 people working together effectively to overcome an overpowering foe.

It's an interesting exercise, and if once every six months Sephiroth (or anyone equally badass.... actually... yeah, Sephiroth) came with an army of the baddest meanest mofos to ever walk the land, and 40+ heroes had to gather to defeat them, that would be *awesome*. But having 40+ "heroes" whooping on some abused little monster, who is hoping to be left alone in an out-of-the-way dungeon.... 4 times a day just doesn't scream "Hero" to me. "Lemming" or "Pikmin": totally, just not very heroic, in my humble opinion.

Did you hear of Achilles at 90 of his closest friends gather together to violate a sumo wrestler?

 

[Seeria]

I enjoy some raiding. I enjoy following a good leader and sometimes enjoy leading raids. A raid of 500 people on a city (SB early days) or a relic raid (daoc) can be rather invigorating.

But we're talking PvE here... which can get pretty dang stale depending on the game, mob, and experience of the raid group. Also, in a game like EQ, raid factor in how many expansions, how twinked = how easy the boss goes down. Usually that equals boredom. One reason I'm returning to EQ's Progressive server, to get a little more taste of what it was like way back when to raid Vox in banded armor. Ah, now there was a challenge, and many many corpse pulls by monks valiant enough to die repeatedly for us.

I'm thinking from how they describe instances here that HJ will not have the EQ type raids. Things will be far more challening and just perhaps... One person can change the diretion of the dynamic raid. Little quirks I call them. Like in EQ LDON's... newbies didn't know about the rocking crates... that would end up blowing us all up or cursing us. Imagine if one persona did something they shouldn't have, and instead of the planned course the raid would get three of the boss, or perhaps a puzzle that must be manipulated by at least 20 players at same time, or......

 

[Ikiru]

Here here Seeria !

 

[JonDDA]

Here here indeed.

Corpse pulls, lol. Someone shouldnt have to die in order for the raid to work, unless it was part of the instance, like you had to sacrifice a party member in order for the demons to stop chasing you or something.

 

[crisisfox]

Originally posted by JonDDA@Jun 16 2006, 01:05 PM
Corpse pulls, lol. Someone shouldnt have to die in order for the raid to work, unless it was part of the instance, like you had to sacrifice a party member in order for the demons to stop chasing you or something.

This is a game of necromancers (where other professions are also allowed to play). So you'll obviously sacrifice a party member so from his life blood daemons of your own can arise at your summoning, to lay waste to the fools who are chasing you.

 

[JonDDA]

/bump for great justice

 

[Karetyr]

There is something immensely cool about an army of players attacking a castle/dragon/whatever. That said, raiding shouldn't be a required part of gameplay - if a single, ultra-powerful hero takes down an evil king, he should be able to steal the dude's Crown of Snoring +5 if he wants to, and not have to rely on an army of whiners who want the same thing.

 

[frostydf2]

I think the requirement of raiding in most games such as WoW is wrong, and that is where people get the idea that raiding is a bad thing to games. That approach in my opinion is. I believe an easy fix, which probably has many flaws, would be to have raiding in-game, and have it be viable as always. When you kill the end 'boss mob', numerous uniques that everyone is cravings STILL drop. However, multiple drops need to occure. Not just one, or two drops, but ten to fifteen.

Now all of you are saying, "How the hell would that fix ANYTHING!?". Well here is my answer, don't make it be required to raid to get those drops. Allow one or two of those drops to occure during a really hard instance. Now many only one to two drop during that hard instance, but their are only 6 people doing the instance. Keep the same challenge up though, however hard it is to beat the boss mob should be how hard it is to complete the instance.

 

[JonDDA]

Originally posted by JonDDA@Jun 11 2006, 11:12 AM
Really, just about the only items your going to be trading or selling will be Wyr, because equipment (armor / weapons) will be completely customized and have there "Uberness" because of the Wyr, and the way they have it where some can be socketed and unsocketed X amount of times and the way Wyr are only useable by certain people ( Male/Female, Certain Race, Certain Class) It should make it so there wont be saturation, because there shouldnt be a lot of the same item.

There will only be a lot of the lower rarity Wyr, but who is going to pay insane amounts for a common Wyr?

Going back to this, when you kill big baddie end guy, Lets say that there are 5 people that took him down.

5 Wyr "drop" each one tuned to each character.

For example.

Group consists of 5 people.

2 burians, one male, one female.

3 Suwari, one male, two female.

1 male burian Wyr will drop. 1 Female burian Wyr will drop.

1 male Suwari Wyr will drop. 2 Femal suwari Wyr will drop.

And the effect of the Wyr should have something to do with the big baddie end guy.

If he is a fiery pin cushion. the Wyr whould be something along the lines of...
+15 fire damage,
-15 piercing damage.

 

[Morneblade]

Originally posted by frostydf2@Jun 26 2006, 06:06 PM
I think the requirement of raiding in most games such as WoW is wrong, and that is where people get the idea that raiding is a bad thing to games. That approach in my opinion is. I believe an easy fix, which probably has many flaws, would be to have raiding in-game, and have it be viable as always. When you kill the end 'boss mob', numerous uniques that everyone is cravings STILL drop. However, multiple drops need to occure. Not just one, or two drops, but ten to fifteen.

Now all of you are saying, "How the hell would that fix ANYTHING!?". Well here is my answer, don't make it be required to raid to get those drops. Allow one or two of those drops to occure during a really hard instance. Now many only one to two drop during that hard instance, but their are only 6 people doing the instance. Keep the same challenge up though, however hard it is to beat the boss mob should be how hard it is to complete the instance.

I'd go a bit farther and say, have something drop for every member of the raid and have it locked so only that person can pick it up (like in DDO). And have the same type of Wyr drop in other parts of the game, I'd be happy. If people REALLY like to raid, not just for the ph4t l3wt, that's cool if it is something they enjoy. I just don't want it to be the only option for high-end Wyr, and have it so only a small % of the people on the raid gain benifit. That way, it works out for everyone, people that like to raid alot can get alot of items. poeple that raid on occation have thier time rewarded, and people that hate it are not required in anyway to raid for any Wyr. Me thinks that would make everyone happy.

 

[QuantumWire]

Originally posted by crisisfox@Jun 15 2006, 01:00 PM
But having 40+ "heroes" whooping on some abused little monster, who is hoping to be left alone in an out-of-the-way dungeon.... 4 times a day just doesn't scream "Hero" to me. "Lemming" or "Pikmin": totally, just not very heroic, in my humble opinion.

Did you hear of Achilles at 90 of his closest friends gather together to violate a sumo wrestler?

At least not in any stories about Achilles that I heard of. Still doesn't mean he didn't, though.

I would like to point out that I never suggested raids against rabbit farms. But I believe the raid-bosses in MMORPGs usually are introduced as sufficiently evil. And, at least in WoW, you can't zerg them since you can only open one instance of a raid dungeon per week.

And, to reply to "It's unfair to go 40 against 1. Look in literature it's usually a small party beating the monster.":
Yes, it is. And I have to admit, with the promise of gamemaster being omnipresent (well, at least present) in HJ, you could stand a chance to overcome an evil arch-foe with a small party by luck and cunning. Like Bard slaying the dragon in The Hobbit by hitting the one spot that Bilbo found out about. BUT it would seriously suck if any 5-man party could pull that off, just read in the forums about the vulnerability of boss A against tactics B and kill him as easy as that. 5 minutes work. You have to admit, in literature, the small party usually succeeds by luck or by some dirty little trick not by going toe-to-toe against the big bad boss. Otherwise he couldn't possibly be so big and bad, could he?

Furthermore, to give one example where a large number of fighters battles a single foe (in tune with Morneblades Lord of the rings example):

In the First Age of Middle Earth during the Nirnaeth Arnoediad, the battle of unnumbered tears, the Dwarves of Belegost SURROUND (i.e. there is probably more than one dwarf) the dragon Glaurung and sufficiently wound him to allow the shattered hosts of elves and man to escape. They win great renown by that, nobody points fingers saying "Oh, with an ARMY against a single foe, how very valiant!"

Also, the Lord of the Rings movie (as opposed to the book) depicts the battle at the end of the second age (Gil-Galad and Elendil vs. Sauron) as if, at the end, Sauron was fighting against the entire army, and winning (only lost due to the dirty little trick of cutting of his ring). Again nobody blames the army for trying, though.

What I am trying to say here is: In my book it is perfectly justified to get 40+ people together to defeat that world-devouring dragon if you can. Going against him with 5 is suicidal, but may be good role-playing. Just don't expect to win.

In general, one shouldn't necessarily compare MMORPGs too closely with literature. It is still a game. For example, in literature, when you are dead, you are dead. Can't do that in a MMORPG. Likewise, it is justified to allow people to battle aforementioned world-devouring dragon (WDD) once a month, e.g., so that they can have fun in the game. I mean, every player wants an opportunity to try his luck against the WDD, so it has to have multiple lives, anyway.