PDA

View Full Version : Low Level Raids



captain1z
01-22-2010, 08:00 PM
To get new players used to the raid dynamic how about adding a raid in korthos inside Misery's Peak, a 3rd level raid.


Also a raid in the harbor, a 5th/6th level raid. Something along the lines of kobold assault but you defend a person of importance who is located inside a 3 story fort and the fort is under siege. Being attacked by kobolds, orcs, ogres, trolls and bugbears you defend the many doors, windows and not so secret passages into this fort from an on rushing horde intent on killing everyone inside.


this would give us raids at:

3rd korthos/below misery's peak

6th under siege

9th tempest spine

12th reaver, Abbot

15th shroud,hound,vod

18th ToD




oh and also if you could delete the character who decided to roll up a 1st level ranger 2 days before the completion of my server transfer that I waited 2 weeks for and thus forcing me to change my 17th level wizards name that would be great kthnxbye. (just a suggestion :) )

adamkatt
01-22-2010, 08:05 PM
I would join a low lvl raid just to watch the chaos....

jcTharin
01-22-2010, 09:02 PM
i can just imagine running with 11 other noobs through the mountain.

Timjc86
01-22-2010, 09:26 PM
This post reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHWyJT2QRMM
*** The good part doesn't start until about 5:40 ***



I fully expect to be tarred, feathered, and driven out of town for posting a WoW video.

I like the idea though.

Edit: Added *** note.

ripperj
01-23-2010, 12:22 AM
This post reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHWyJT2QRMM



I fully expect to be tarred, feathered, and driven out of town for posting a WoW video.

I like the idea though.

that was kinda funny, something surprised me though
at the end, how they celebrated the victory, they actually cheered and
jumped around like it was something major:P

around here, finish ne big raid no screw ups: 'great run guys' and split:P

Angelus_dead
01-23-2010, 01:38 AM
To get new players used to the raid dynamic how about adding a raid in korthos inside Misery's Peak, a 3rd level raid.
Hi, welcome. Are you aware of what it's like to play a below-level-cap raid in DDO?

Look at places like Vault of Night, Twilight Forge, Zawabi's Revenge, and Reaver's Fate. What happens to the gameplay when thse raids are no longer near the level cap? Would it be good or bad to replicate that gameplay elsewhere?

sirgog
01-24-2010, 01:04 AM
Hi, welcome. Are you aware of what it's like to play a below-level-cap raid in DDO?

Look at places like Vault of Night, Twilight Forge, Zawabi's Revenge, and Reaver's Fate. What happens to the gameplay when thse raids are no longer near the level cap? Would it be good or bad to replicate that gameplay elsewhere?

That's a problem with having content with lockout timers below level cap, not a problem with having raids below cap.

Tempest's Spine remains popular on the servers today. No level 20s bother with it, but there's often 8-11 or 9-12 TS normal groups or 12-14 elite groups going. It's probably the most popular quest of its level, despite offering less XP/time than Reclamation in Ataraxia's Haven.

It's perfect because it's both forgiving enough to be fun to newer players, but tough enough to require *some* strategy, and has areas where every class can shine. (It would be better if the absolute requirement to have an 18 Int character was removed, however).

Angelus_dead
01-24-2010, 08:01 PM
That's a problem with having content with lockout timers below level cap, not a problem with having raids below cap.
That is incorrect, as can be obviously noticed if one imagines what would happen if the lockout timers were removed from the content I listed.

However, removing the DDO rule that Dungeon Scaling and hirelings don't work in raids would help reduce some problems and make low-level raids more reasonable.


Tempest's Spine remains popular on the servers today.
That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is not presently popular.

SimVerg
01-24-2010, 08:07 PM
The forums need to let posters save macro responses so that AD is saved from having to type out an original response to this idea every 3 months.

Lorien_the_First_One
01-24-2010, 08:17 PM
That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is not presently popular.


OOOO.... Docwho is gonna lay a beating on you for this :p

Angelus_dead
01-24-2010, 08:40 PM
The forums need to let posters save macro responses so that AD is saved from having to type out an original response to this idea every 3 months.
Yeah, although it's still a simple concept, so I should be able to paste it in rather quickly. Here's a fast version of the problems with raids of below top level:

1. If the raid isn't close to top level, then characters will exist who are well above the raid's level (called "hibies").

2. Raids have good named loot, so some hibies will want to play it for that loot.

3. Lowbies trying to run the raid have difficulty avoiding grouping with hibies. Technically they can prevent it with their own discipline, but the game design doesn't encourage that. To exclude hibies means greatly delaying the assembly of the raid group, and also making the completion more difficult, costly, slower, and risky.

4. Having hibies in the raid group reduces the challenge to below the designers' intention.

5. Content lacking the intended challenge is less fun.


Now, there are changes that could be made to avoid the problem, some of which could work.
1. Remove the good loot from the raid. This would keep hibies out, but cause other problems by making the raid insufficiently rewarding for at-level characters.

2. Allow Dungeon Scaling and/or hirelings to work in raids. This would make it easier for players to exclude hibies from raids without excessively delaying the formation of their group. But it somewhat undermines the goal, as it means that the content will often be experienced as if it were an ordinary quest and not a raid at all.
That may or may not be satisfying to those customers who request low-level raids (maybe all they really want is the opportunity to have more than 6 people in a group, which might be better served by flagging certain dungeons to scale their headcount up to 9).

DANTEIL
01-24-2010, 09:10 PM
3. Lowbies trying to run the raid have difficulty avoiding grouping with hibies. Technically they can prevent it with their own discipline, but the game design doesn't encourage that. To exclude hibies means greatly delaying the assembly of the raid group, and also making the completion more difficult, costly, slower, and risky.

4. Having hibies in the raid group reduces the challenge to below the designers' intention.


So point #3 (paraphrased as "excluding hibies makes completion more difficult") and point #4 (paraphrased as "including hibies makes completion less difficult") are really the same thing, right?

And my gosh, when these raids were at level cap, how on earth did any of you intrepid folk ever manage to complete them without the tender and loving hand of a higher-level character to gently pull you through? Maybe lower-level characters putting up LFMs for these hypothetical low-level raids might purposely choose to restrict the level range to exclude higher-level characters, not only for XP but also because the challenge might actually be more fun that way (like you suggest).

I think that a lower-level raid would be a great idea, primary to get people used to the complexity and dynamics of raids. It's not just the number of people allowed in the dungeon, but also the fact that sometimes you have to split groups or engage in pulling tactics, etc etc. And perhaps the raid loot could be appropriately scaled lower-level-but-still-good-but-not-as-good-as-hibie-preferred-gear.

sirgog
01-24-2010, 11:33 PM
That is incorrect, as can be obviously noticed if one imagines what would happen if the lockout timers were removed from the content I listed.

However, removing the DDO rule that Dungeon Scaling and hirelings don't work in raids would help reduce some problems and make low-level raids more reasonable.

If the lockout timer was removed from the Titan, or the VONs, you'd see a lot more groups of at-level characters running them for both XP and loot. (The preraids in both offer enormous XP).

As it is, noone bothers to because it takes so long to fill a group for the raid and once you have a group, you won't be able to repeat it without forming another group from scratch three days later. VON5 is pretty good XP/min if you don't mess around, but if you spend 30 minutes filling a group it's not so good.




That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is not presently popular.

It's the most commonly run of the F2P 'endgame' at the moment - there's a LOT more Tempest Spine groups than there are for Dreams of Insanity, Black Anvil Mines or Invaders. Most vets run it once on each difficulty while levelling.

It's certainly more commonly run than most other content that it is competing with - Ataraxia's Haven, Necro 2-3, Desert walkups, level 11 House quests, etc. The only more popular quests in the level 8-12 range are Stormcleave and Wiz-King.

Level 20 characters aren't interested in running it - but that's true of all the other content of that level range anyway. Look at how many TS LFMs go up over a weekend. It remains popular despite having no appeal (save favor) to 'highbes', in much the same way that Stormcleave Outpost or Trial by Fire remain very popular quests with little/no appeal to 'highbes'.



Future low level raids should be designed in this manner - keep the encouragement of full groups, but make them have significant rewards that are only of merit to lowbies - and high XP with solid, but quickly replaced loot is the best way to replicate the success of TS.

Loki
01-27-2010, 01:28 AM
That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is not presently popular.

Sorry man, I see LFMs for TS all the time. Being the only F2P raid that I'm aware of (I'll admit that I don't pay attention to F2P vs P2P content) likely has a lot to do with that. So it may not be popular with the vets, it certainly seems popular with the overall server population.

Memnir
01-27-2010, 01:35 AM
I'm happy with Tempest being the "trainer" raid. Any earlier than that, and you'll have new players who don't really know what they're doing in terms of gear, builds, or game mechanics struggling to handle it.

/not signed

Shassa
01-27-2010, 02:01 AM
My, you make a lot of assumptions...



1. If the raid isn't close to top level, then characters will exist who are well above the raid's level (called "hibies").
Okay, I don't see the problem with that.


2. Raids have good named loot, so some hibies will want to play it for that loot.
I still don't see the problem with that.


3. Lowbies trying to run the raid have difficulty avoiding grouping with hibies. Technically they can prevent it with their own discipline, but the game design doesn't encourage that. To exclude hibies means greatly delaying the assembly of the raid group, and also making the completion more difficult, costly, slower, and risky.
The whole game is like this. If your fun is in the challenge, go for it. If you just want the loot, pike through it. Why are we worried about other people's motives again?


4. Having hibies in the raid group reduces the challenge to below the designers' intention.
Again I don't see the problem with that, and again the whole game is like this. Besides, there are penalties for going this route.


5. Content lacking the intended challenge is less fun.
Maybe for you. To some others, getting their loot in the quickest way possible might be more fun.
You're a bright guy, A_D, but you gotta learn that you don't speak for everyone. Not for me, not the devs, not the community at large, no one but you.

Krag
01-27-2010, 02:54 AM
Future low level raids should be designed in this manner - keep the encouragement of full groups, but make them have significant rewards that are only of merit to lowbies - and high XP with solid, but quickly replaced loot is the best way to replicate the success of TS.

QFT!
Solid exp and good-at-level loot is the key to keep highbies away. Something like +1 Reptilian Bane weapon or Moderate Fortification Robe is a blast to have in low-level content, but it's appeal for mid-high levels is close to 0.

Lleren
01-27-2010, 03:22 AM
4th level raids are one of the things I have wanted since "veteran" characters came out.

sirgog
01-27-2010, 04:24 AM
QFT!
Solid exp and good-at-level loot is the key to keep highbies away. Something like +1 Reptilian Bane weapon or Moderate Fortification Robe is a blast to have in low-level content, but it's appeal for mid-high levels is close to 0.

IMO you could go to a higher power level than that.

Min level 9 +6 stat rings (all of this binds to character), min level 9 Wizardry 5 trinket, min level 8 +2 paralyzing weapons, min level 8 Superior Potency 5, bound +2 tomes - all of these are great items at the level you get them, all of them are either equalled or outclassed by Vale of Twilight quest loot drops on hard. (This would assume a level 8 or 9 raid)


If it's a level 6 raid instead, (all min level 6, all bound to character) +4 or +5 stat rings, +1 tomes, +5 frost weapons, +5 adamantine or mithril armor, Heavy Fort robe, Sup Pot 4 item (or Greater Pot 4 in an unusual slot like trinket) - plenty of options exist to keep the loot compelling to lowbies and worthless to highbes.

Angelus_dead
01-27-2010, 06:22 AM
If the lockout timer was removed from the Titan, or the VONs, you'd see a lot more groups of at-level characters running them for both XP and loot.
No. What would really happen is that the low-level players would start to form their group, and it would take several minutes. Then a character of +1 level higher would hear about it, and ask to join. After a little consideration and recognizing that the main benefit for completing the raid is the chance for powerful named loot, they would accept the hibie. Then additional hibies would ask to join, probably of even higher level, and they would be accepted too.

After all, the lowbie players won't really mind the XP penalty, because if XP was their motivation they wouldn't be going to Titan in the first place.

Removing the lockout timer would technically enable low-level players to run the raid more times before they level up, but it wouldn't change the dominant factor:
The raid has a low drop rate of loot which is valuable to top-level characters, so the majority of runs of the raid will involve top-level looters.


(The preraids in both offer enormous XP).
At-level characters can already farm preraid XP without waiting on a lockout timer. In fact, some TR players actually do farm VON5 XP, although not often enough to call it popular.

PS. I should note that an excellent way to fix this problem would be to create a mechanic so that players could voluntarily and temporarily reduce the level of their characters, including de-powering their gear. Then characters could be prohibited from looting a raid if their effective level were above +1 over the quest. That would be a great way to fix it, but it would obviously take an enormous amount of technical and design effort.

Angelus_dead
01-27-2010, 06:36 AM
The whole game is like this. If your fun is in the challenge, go for it. If you just want the loot, pike through it.
Incorrect. Most of the quests throughout the game are primarily run by characters of around the intended level. That should be obvious if you pay attention while playing DDO.

Favor runs are not a significant factor, because each character only ever needs to get the favor once. There are also some low-level quests with loot that remains attractive later, such as Xorian Cipher: but because dungeons don't need as many players as raids do, that doesn't create an obstacle to the formation of lowbie groups.


Why are we worried about other people's motives again?
Because they impact gameplay for everyone. It is blatantly fallacious to claim that the actions of other people don't matter. Here's a large article (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=186945) explaining why that is.


Maybe for you. To some others, getting their loot in the quickest way possible might be more fun.
You're a bright guy, A_D, but you gotta learn that you don't speak for everyone. Not for me, not the devs, not the community at large, no one but you.
Incorrect. The claim to which you are referring is an elementary aspect of game design, with which every game designer around the world would fundamentally agree.

If you don't see why that is, there are schools and books that would be happy to help.

KKDragonLord
01-27-2010, 06:45 AM
This post reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wHWyJT2QRMM



I fully expect to be tarred, feathered, and driven out of town for posting a WoW video.

I like the idea though.

Very fun vid, nice soundtrack

i wonder if im the only one who thought "my they are taking an awful long time just to get there"

oh yeah... and "I wish DDO had Gnomes"

sirgog
01-27-2010, 07:00 AM
Incorrect. The claim to which you are referring is an elementary aspect of game design, with which every game designer around the world would fundamentally agree.

If you don't see why that is, there are schools and books that would be happy to help.

You always claim that your opinion is 'correct', and that the opinions of others that disagree with you are 'incorrect'.

Let's instead look at the provable FACTS.

What was the most popular pre-Shroud raid, according to a forum poll run soon after Mod 5 hit?

Was it the at-cap Reaver raid? The above-cap Abbot raid? The slightly below cap DQ raid?

No, no and no. It was the well-below cap Tempest's Spine. The raid that geared, capped characters had no incentive to run, but that most players ran while levelling because they found it was fun. A raid that, even now, a group fills up for far faster than groups fill for ToD, VoD or Epic DQ2. The raid that people set up a 9-12 group for, then hit 'decline' when a level 13, 14 or 20 tries to join.


That's all fact, no opinion. (Shroud is now more popular than TS, and that's also fact).

Now for my opinion. Lower level raids (in the level 6-9 range) would be viable if and only if they meet the following critera:

1) Good XP/time ratio (doesn't need to be Shadow Crypt good, but should offer at least the XP/time of Stormcleave). Preferably, XP should be awarded for 'partial' completion as it is in Devil Assault.
2) Loot that's very powerful at the level you get it
3) Loot that's not at all desirable to level 15+ characters
4) No lockout timer (so people don't run the raid once, get on a 66 hour lockout, then outlevel it before they can come back).
5) The raid should be tough enough that wipes can happen, but forgiving enough that many, many strategies are viable. (Example: Gwylan's Stand on Hard with a level 7 party - wipes can happen but careful players won't suffer many).

A raid satisfying all of these criteria would be a popular part of the levelling game and irrelevant to endgame, just as non-raid quests like Stormcleave Outpost are.

Timjc86
01-27-2010, 03:19 PM
Very fun vid, nice soundtrack

i wonder if im the only one who thought "my they are taking an awful long time just to get there"

oh yeah... and "I wish DDO had Gnomes"

Yeah, I posted it up before re-watching it. I had completely forgotten about all the extra fluff at the beginning. I'll throw a note in my first post.

Cripey
01-27-2010, 03:24 PM
That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is not presently popular.


That is incorrect. Tempest Spine is presently popular.

Montrose
01-27-2010, 04:00 PM
These are certainly some interesting discussion on the relative mertis of having or not having a raid, but I think a major point is being missed here.

Obviously there is some non-zero level of desire for a "low level raid". The topic keep coming up on these forums, and every time the topic comes up there are several "I like this idea" posts in the thread.

This leads me to ask two major questions:

1) What do people mean when they ask for a low level raid?
Is it just a quest that lets 12 people in? Is it the inclusion of a difficult mob with unique mechanics? Would a 12 person stormcleave be a raid? Is it the inclusion of named and bound loot?

2) Why there is interest in a "low level raid"?
Very related to #1, of course. What is the motivating factor behind this request? Do people just want to be able to play with more people? Is it the extra challenge that raids usually posses? Is it the loot? Some combination of all of the above?

Some very valid arguments have been presented as to why beneath-cap raids would be non-optimal. But if we knew the underlying desires behind the request, it may be possible to suggest alternate solutions rather than just dropping a new raid into the game.

Maybe the solution is to have more quests with unique elements (like crucible), or maybe the solution is to have more non-loot raids (like tempest spine). Without having a good grasp of the customer desire, it's difficult to have a conversation more developed than "it is a good idea" versus "it is a bad idea".