With the walk-up IP LFM it might be nice if a new LFM is being created to put it up and not immediately enter the dungeon if the person starting it wants to wait for the party to fill a little.
Also, if the quest has been IP for a while, could be quite a run for anyone from the entrance to the current party, even if they know the way and everything's been cleared; perhaps a "teleport to leader from entrance" reverse-DD function, but not automatic in case the leader is dead in lava. Or maybe automatic after some time delay to get the pikers.
 Which is basically what I thought of a while ago. Don't recall if I posted it on the forums, but I did think once that it would be nice on entering a dungeon to know if there were anybody else already in there and about a waiting-area antechamber for on-the-spot PUGs. "You all met at the dungeon entrance..."
Last edited by Frotz; 04-11-2012 at 12:00 PM.
A very interesting idea. I'm generally in favor of making grouping easier for people who would otherwise be shy about the process. However, a few suggestions:
1. Allow a time limit to be set at the start. This would address the issue of having 5 people join right before the boss fight and messing with your scaling without even helping you -- or simply people waiting until the heavy lifting was done. Ideally, you WANT people joining soon after starting.
2. Allow the originator to set a maximum party size (up to 6). Sometimes you just prefer a smaller group.
3. Definitely allow level ranges to be specified.
4. Disallow squelched individuals. 99% of the community is just fine to run with, but occasionally we run into players who are so rude and inconsiderate that we would rather not group with them again. I'd hate to have to choose between running with these people, and avoiding the auto-grouping feature.
I do worry about the teleportation thing. I get the need for it, but new players NEED to learn to find their way to quests. With this system, you could level all the way to 20 and never learn where anything is.
I do share many people's concerns about XP loss, and chains/flaggings... a few other things that "new" (meaning everyone since "share please") players do not understand about the game though...
[QUOTE=Phax;4402365]Here are some followups:
- The time that the adventure has been active will be right on the LFM posting.
- I agree it will be necessary to do something about pikers.
It's good that you guys see this potential issue. I am at a loss how you can truly address this without lots of side effects though.
- There will be an option to hide these new public LFMs. This setting will be saved.
- You can pre-select class makeup and level range in the Create Party panel BEFORE entering the quest, and your new public LFM will inherit those settings.
That sounds like a lot of work for these new players who are too lazy to use the normal LFM screen honestly.
- When party leadership changes, the LFM will automatically be transfered to the new leader.
Who if a clueless newbie which this system apparently is all about catering to would have no clue they had inherited it in all likelyhood.
- There is a new information alert for the leader of a public LFM that explains the feature and will bring up the Create Party panel when clicked (to help players who are unfamiliar with the system).
- The portal UI will remember your selections, so if you only ever want a private instance, you'll only have to select it once and never think about it again.
This is a very good touch as it cuts down on the hassle factor added to existing players who find this option to be bad design.
- I'd like to add an option for "Auto-post LFM even when private", so you can have the LFM automatically posted with the correct quest/difficulty, and retain all the existing invitation request/management functionality.
I like this idea alot.
- Quests will most likely not be auto-shared, but players will get a warning if they are not on the correct chapter/goal.
How about for quests with required pre-reqs? Are people going to be able to sneak inside of those or are they going to get some bizzare error message that they will then be asking about in general chat in the harbor about and getting wrong answers to?
When do they get this warning? That is important, because with auto teleport upon joining if it is not before joining then it is too late and many will be doing the 'oh let me grab the quest brb' and there goes re-entry.
- The only thing the leader will not be able to change in the Create Party panel is the quest and difficulty level, as those are tied to the in-progess adventure.
I guess the main thing I am unclear about the UI is how you actually select the party make up you desire on a public LFM. Lots of people will think about the old single rogue or healer wanted, but no one cares about the rest of the party make up for easier content. The standard LFM works because you can put up that general class listing and then restrict it down as the party fills. This system though if it is the same sort of class listing thing then you could easily have three people from the same guild for example hit your public lfm at the same time and fill it up without you being able to restrict down to that limited scope for the last spot.
- If you do not own the content, you will not be allowed to join the group.
That seems logical. Again how about quests with pre-reqs? This time less about the warning and more about how this actually works. How about raids or epics with timers? It's not like we have never seen a raid timer bypass exploit enter the game so it seems like a good question to ask.
Out of quotes for easy later quoting replies in Red
Proud Recipient of At least 8 Negative Rep From NA Threads.
I've been playing for 2 years now. I might actually participate in my first PUG under this system.
Many thanks to the Devs for coming up with this.
I like all of the ideas so far.
Any chance of a TR icon?
The devs of course said right away there would be no incentives to use the auto group system and then we find out with the first revealing of any details that a very big incentive in auto teleportating to inside the instance is a part of these new public LFMs and will not be added to private ones.
Walk up times is a big part of the xp/min equation. Heck, we were just running GH last night and we had a few minutes for every quest spent on walk up times. With quests under 10 minutes (which those are) that really makes a big difference. In fact, it is more then 10% for many quests.
Add on the 'form up' time when you put up a traditional LFM because this eliminates that by putting people in dungeon upon joining and you have alot of time savings.
Proud Recipient of At least 8 Negative Rep From NA Threads.
Since you are working on LFM code, it would be nice to add a feature that I have seen requested a few times, which is to withdraw your request to join a group. For example you hit an LFM, you get no response for a few minutes, then decide you no longer want to join the group, or want to join another group and hit another LFM. Unfortunately the original group still pull you in at any time since there is no way to withdraw your request to join.
As for the proposed system, I think it seems like a good alternative to the LFG feature that never really got off the ground.
Ghallanda: Save the newbie, save the world.
Besides, I have found TR isn't all it's cracked up to be as a filter. Just yesterday I had a tell for a GH quest on elite from someone who was BELOW the level range I had specified, but said "I'm a TR". So I let him in, only to see he had 125 HP, no fort, and no idea where the quest was. Mind you, I had no problem with him joining, I'm sure he learned something from getting one-shotted from those traps, but that tells me "TR" isn't much of a filter. I would have preferred it if he had said "I don't know the quest, mind if I tag along?"
Last edited by justagame; 04-11-2012 at 11:40 AM.
I really have mixed feelings about this. I despise the "auto-grouping" Instance Finder feature that was added to LOTRO, and so I am glad that the systems designers here have explicitly said that this is not intended to be like LOTRO's auto-grouping. In principle -- as someone who is hesitant to create my own group, mostly because I'm not a leader-type -- I could see this as being a good thing. However, I also never join "in progress" groups either, which it seems like this auto-grouping thing will lead to 98% of the time. So like with most things, I'll have to see how it works out in practice..
Read through page five so far... wow.
People really do play this game differently than I do...lol.
If you want to keep being selective in your LFMs, than "don't" use the new system. He already said the old way will still be there for you to use.
The only effect this may have on you old vets that want to screen everyone for your perfect party is that maybe....just maybe... people will stot begging to be allowed ino your exclusive groups and start creating a culture where people just group up and do quests without having to submit a resume.
...and you will have to wait even longer to fill you perfect group.
I really doubt this wil change raids at all.
unless you are in the habit of zoning into a raid before you post your LFM.
I am sure that raids will still be grouped using the old system.
as will timed quests.
From everything that has been said so far, I see this as just an option, that will have no real (immediate anyway) effect on those who do not want to use it.
That said... I do expect many issues to arise because of it though. Many have been mentioned here already.
The Grease clickers.
The zerger/soloer who just runs to the end and either doesn't care about anyone else, or gets truly offended when someone dies, and may pick up a soul stone and just keep running to the end with it. (maybe this is actually two types)
I do think that "IP" LFMs are "not" new guy friendly though.
so while this system wil attract new players (at first) it will also hurt them, because they cannot get to the quest, and cannot catch up once they get inside it.
and if the people already inside did not kill everything... or disable traps etc...
Then you have bad feelings, even if griefing was not intended.
The stuff you describe happening in the new system already happen in the old system in IP groups. There are also DA griefers - which are also inherant on the old system as well.
Advocating repeated nerfs in the name of "balancing the game" then complaining about how DDO is moving away from D&D, is a direct contradiction in logic - D&D 3.5 (what DDO is based on) is not a balanced game. We can either have a balanced clone MMO with homogenized classes, or we can have a D&D game. We cant have both.
Ghallanda: Vilas, Alphon, Whelm, Thaylan, Tyclmi, Amgine, Talc, Dedlee, Payle, Darell, Talenta, Zhen, Thrane, Arrith, Durdyn, Magefyre, Necrophil, Tulgey, Borogove, Hasugi, Shawal, Hailestorm, Branthan Sarlona: Darrick, Schweet, Omagus, Chudan, Runeshot Cannith: Leeve, Alzon
This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.Reload