|
|
Post by Lugwy on Jun 30, 2017 22:29:48 GMT -5
In a way the server promotes soloing, especially in higher levels and in certain areas where mob scaling becomes severe. While bosses are difficult to solo at best, they are a minor aspect of server content, and between the difficulty of handling larger/more difficult spawns and the issues with getting a group together to run something, when a player can handle content solo just fine it doesn't give them much of an incentive to group and increase the dungeon difficulty, potentially risking a wipe.
In that vein, and after a bit of back-and-forth with a few players, I was wondering if it would be feasible to encourage more grouping by giving players in a party a stacking skill EXP bonus per party member, up to a maximum limit of stacks, after which more members would not affect the bonus. For instance, if there was a system that offered 10% bonus skill EXP per extra party member up to a maximum of 50% extra skill EXP with six players, a seventh person entering the instance wouldn't add another stack until one of the members leaves the area.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitsunenotsume on Jun 30, 2017 23:24:21 GMT -5
Another side effect I've noticed of partying up that this might help at least alleviate is the reduced speed at which a party will clear content when compared to an individual.
In addition to more individual mobs, a party will often slow in progress when talking (contributing to BXP, but no more-so than a similar level of chatter in the free Market). Coordination, while it lets you to harder things, yes, takes significantly longer, and the average take-away per-person-per-encounter isn't really changed greatly. Taking the time to actually assemble and organize a party often takes as long as the dungeon itself could have been done solo.
|
|
|
|
Post by electrohydra on Jul 1, 2017 0:11:07 GMT -5
I don't like this, it's just punishing to people who might not be able to make larger parties for one reason or another.
|
|
|
|
Post by drunkensolamnic on Jul 1, 2017 1:21:57 GMT -5
As someone who does both, it is a much bigger investment and much better for the server for people to be forming groups. That said, it also locks core roles into place and makes it harder for certain folks to advance... so if Emmanuel for example could get more for the shot he gets off in between keeping people alive, i'm for it. The XP caps obviously would stay the same, so it doesnt punish anyone, just means people hit that cap sooner when in groups, which might help offset having to split time across roles or the time investment ahead to cap out a dungeon in 1 trip instead of two.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lugwy on Jul 1, 2017 1:39:48 GMT -5
There's no EXP penalty involved when soloing. Gains will be the same as always, and it will still be feasible to solo your way to high skill ranks. The system is supposed to reward the hassles involved of grouping given scaled spawns, slower progression, and coordinating with other party members. I doubt any actual implemented value would be as high as 10% per member, but I'd like to promote some incentive to group when it seems the reigning inclination for higher-leveled people to get their gains is to solo.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kitsunenotsume on Jul 1, 2017 2:51:29 GMT -5
I don't like this, it's just punishing to people who might not be able to make larger parties for one reason or another. I think what EH means here (based off previous methods of comparison) is that it would be less optimal to solo than to party, so compared to the best possible situation, it would be worse to solo if larger parties are not available. Which I agree with. It would reduce the potency of solo or solo + hirelings because parties are currently the less optimal option. Running around with a hireling takes a lot less investment of time, resources, and communication than managing a 5-man plus raid, but given the current metrics seems to have superior returns. In particular, consider the discussions consistently on Waterfall Mines, Swamp Cave, Wyler, or the Plencktin raid. Most of the feedback on the Discord chat seems to revert back to "Party is really tough, much prefer going through solo or 2 people" |
|
|
|
Post by electrohydra on Jul 1, 2017 11:05:35 GMT -5
If parties are too hard, that doesn't mean they need more incentives, that means the mechanics need to be tweaked to make partying not be harder then solo.
Although I'm not sure at all that partying is -inherently- harder then solo. The biggest difference is that partying is more often unbalanced (in terms of party composition) then solo+henchman, since you can always pick the right henchman for the job (Which is almost always the tank. That means something). The problem isn't how hard partying is, I think, but rather that the character archetypes are not split in a way that makes balanced parties common. (Through no fault of any player, mind you. As mentioned in another thread, there are more non-damage taker archetypes then tank archetypes, so people will gravitate to the former more then to the latter.)
I just did my first party run in a while yesterday, in the Waterfall Mines, with a -balanced- party and it was easier then any solo+henchman run I've made.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lugwy on Jul 1, 2017 17:40:52 GMT -5
I will be very interested to see how it would be feasible to scale party content in a way that actually rewards partying, or in a way that doesn't pull the teeth out of server content.
With hirelings, you grab and go. With a party of PCs, you have the issue of trying to coordinate (are you available at this time? Can you make it? Can you do this while we do that in the party?) and ensuring a balanced party composition (whoops, 4 dps archetypes and none wants to tank in a pinch). Picking up people off the player lists risks an unbalanced/suboptimal party paradigm, while organising a balanced party from the get-go takes coordinating every member's schedules to coincide.
It's true that a balanced party can go very well. It's not always better than solo, though, and in my personal experience for every party that succeeds quickly, I can name two more that wipe, expend more resources and time progressing than a smaller or solo expedition, or are forced to turn back early. Positive experiences don't always negate the negative ones.
|
|
