Discussion: Update 5: Instance Finder Developer Diary Feedback

I simply won't use this tool in its' current state.

The 'why?' is pretty simple. The developers can 'respectfully disagree' that there is a problem releasing a half-baked tool that removes player choice. They can rationalize it by saying they need a lot of players to properly QA test it. None of that changes the fact that players are being coerced into content and groups that are entirely random. This tool is remarkably incomplete and I will not use it.

Envoyé par ransroth

Hi folks,...
...You have two minutes to click Ready, but then you can leave and retrait if need be. I'm hoping to have something that will help with the retraiting problem in the future.

Oh, sounds like we could save different traitsets in the future without having to change every single trait at the Bard!? If yes, i hope thats also possible without going back to town. That would be really great!

Envoyé par Schinderhannes

Oh, sounds like we could save different traitsets in the future without having to change every single trait at the Bard!? If yes, i hope thats also possible without going back to town. That would be really great!

Don't be so hasty yet.

*New item introduced - Trait saver - allows you to save a set of traits and change them as you want*

Only 799 TP.

Envoyé par ransroth

Hi folks,

Just read through the thread and figured I'll try to address some of the questions that came up.


There were several other people concerned about this.We would like to add all of the Instance Join features into Instance Finder in Update 6. This would involve allowing you to do all the things you can now do with Instance Join in IF. For example, you are able to take a particular raid, configure it, and run it with your current group using IJ. So, if we were to replace it with IF, it would have a way for you to do that. You would also have a way to run an instance undermanned, overlevel, with a fellowship that doesn't have compatible levels, etc.

There are some significant complications in trying to match players together for raids - so it's possible that the only way you could run raids would be to come in with a premade raid, and select exactly the raid you want to run.

Nice. Sounds like no features will be lost when this is finalized, and we will have the option to use both UNTIL its finalized? That is fair IMHO. Thanks for the response.

Also, I was frequenting the Rift forums when they talked about a cross server LFF tool. Good grief, you would think the proposal was to beat baby seals with baby bunnies in front of starving children. :/ I can't see anything wrong with the option. People are scared of bad pugs and you don't have to leave your server to find a bad pug Lets get that guy that needs DD on Brandywine matched up with that girl that needs DD on Landroval so they can finally get their quests, deeds, and skill completed!

Envoyé par telbric

Please don't, not even as an optional feature, not ever. If the queue turns out to be horribly long, it means that either/or a) the tool is not being used, b) the server in question has a population that's too low and it's time to think about merging it. Cross-server is a bandaid that causes communities to collapse, not a solution.

QFT

I'm all in favor of merging smaller servers if that will improve conditions for people who want to run instances, but there are so many good reasons not to start doing cross-server grouping. The biggest ones to me are the loss of opportunities to meet players on your own server that you can continue to run with in the future (I meet tons of great people in PUGs) and it removes the implicit accountability of the server. Don't mess with our communities, please. (And no, giving an opt out option doesn't remove my concerns because cross server grouping will likely end up forcing everyone to opt in if they want to be able to find a group).

Envoyé par hucklebarry

Nice. Sounds like no features will be lost when this is finalized, and we will have the option to use both UNTIL its finalized? That is fair IMHO. Thanks for the response.

Also, I was frequenting the Rift forums when they talked about a cross server LFF tool. Good grief, you would think the proposal was to beat baby seals with baby bunnies in front of starving children. :/ I can't see anything wrong with the option. People are scared of bad pugs and you don't have to leave your server to find a bad pug Lets get that guy that needs DD on Brandywine matched up with that girl that needs DD on Landroval so they can finally get their quests, deeds, and skill completed!

While I'm not scared of it and think it is OK, I see that there are social issues. People with a bad reputation on their server (for poor behavior in groups, say) will likely be on lots of local ignore lists. But now will get to inflict the "pleasure" of their company on others on other servers too... I imagine there isn't current tech to "/ignore" folks on other servers, either...

Don't get me wrong, I think the benefits of cross server queues outweigh the above issue...

BTW, one of the dialogs has a minor wording glitch. It says to 'Click the "Leave Queue" button', and there is no such button? There is a "Leave" button visible though. Just saying, the thing in quotes should be the literal label on the button...

Envoyé par DelgonTheWise

While I'm not scared of it and think it is OK, I see that there are social issues. People with a bad reputation on their server (for poor behavior in groups, say) will likely be on lots of local ignore lists. But now will get to inflict the "pleasure" of their company on others on other servers too... I imagine there isn't current tech to "/ignore" folks on other servers, either...

Don't get me wrong, I think the benefits of cross server queues outweigh the above issue...

Agreed both with your opinion and summary. However, the random workings of the tool resolves alot of this I think. Sure, you can still run across bad players, but IMHO that is nothing like running across someone that changes the loot rule or starts booting everyone (both of which can't be done using the tool). Not disagreeing as I do see the pros and cons... I just think the cons are heavily inflated with angst while the pros can solve a real problem. Having seen the cross server PvP tool from another game, I think this will work even better in LOTRO and it worked very well there.

It was good to finally read some details about the Instance Finder. I know many players are violently opposed to the tool, but my group is actually looking forward to testing it out. Two questions that we have:

1. Will Hunters be able to select the Defense role? We have 5 hunters and would like the IF to match us up with a Healer. But according to the Dev Diary, at least one of us must select Defense - is this possible?
2. Will the IF tool know which Skirmishes/Instances are available for F2P/Premium players? If a F2P player is in the Fellowship when the Leader joins the IF, will it only put us into Gondamon or Tuckborough since those are the only ones the F2P player has access to?

Envoyé par Ciryandir

I simply won't use this tool in its' current state.

The 'why?' is pretty simple. The developers can 'respectfully disagree' that there is a problem releasing a half-baked tool that removes player choice. They can rationalize it by saying they need a lot of players to properly QA test it. None of that changes the fact that players are being coerced into content and groups that are entirely random. This tool is remarkably incomplete and I will not use it.

I highlighted the one thing to point out an error. The Feb diary and the debate have said it a dozen times: you can use IF with a pre-formed group. In other words there is no coercion to have randomized groups, its an OPTION along with coming in as an existing group. Yes there is an incentive to run random content but I don't think coercion is the right word.

Q: What happened to the Skirmish Daily Rewards?

A: The incentive to play a variety of Skirmishes (as opposed to the same one over and over), that the daily rewards provided has been replaced by the Instance Finder bonus effect. The Currency Dev Diary by Zombie_Columbus will cover more on this.

I could have sworn that one of the BR forums had a blue name comment indicating that daily rewards were being wrapped back into the standard (non-IF) drop rates and that the IF bonus would be a true bonus on top of that. (i.e., 10 non-IF rift skirms is equivalent in rewards to 10 rift skirms with dailies before the update.) I can't find that comment so I might have imagined it. But anyways, if that is the case than I don't have a problem with the IF because I haven't lost anything with it being implemented, I can only gain by using it or stay the same by ignoring it.

If, however, the instance finder has truly replaced the daily rewards then I do have a serious semantic issue with this. The "bonus" then isn't anything that exceeds our current expectations for rewards, it is required to maintain those expectations. Look up bonus in a dictionary, I don't believe that you'll find a definition of bonus that references maintaining expectations. If that's the case, than so be it, but let's change the name to something accurate. How does "Baseline Reward Maintenance Incentive" sound? (After all, it is a new incentive that is required in order to maintain the current baseline of rewards.)

Envoyé par Pele_the_Wrym

If, however, the instance finder has truly replaced the daily rewards then I do have a serious semantic issue with this. The "bonus" then isn't anything that exceeds our current expectations for rewards, it is required to maintain those expectations. Look up bonus in a dictionary, I don't believe that you'll find a definition of bonus that references maintaining expectations. If that's the case, than so be it, but let's change the name to something accurate. How does "Baseline Reward Maintenance Incentive" sound? (After all, it is a new incentive that is required in order to maintain the current baseline of rewards.)

Before IF - use IJ to complete a skirmish and get bonus. Run that instance again and get NO bonus.
After IF - use IF to complete a skirmish and get bonus (equal to bonus before IF). Run that instance again and get bonus again.

No dailies means you get the bonus everytime. Just throwing out numbers... lets say you got 300 skirmish marks using IJ and the daily. IF will net you the equivalent of 300 skirmish marks EVERY time you run it, whereas any subsequent run under IJ would only yield 200. (rough numbers).

Yes the bonus is equal to current, but they removed the gate so it is a bonus on any subsequent runs. There is no longer a need to keep track and feel like one isn't profitable just because you already ran it. IMHO, it now makes much more sense.

AND, since you can still solo using IF and preform your groups, I don't really understand the desire to use the old tool, ESPECIALLY once they finalize it. I think it was bad to release it too soon, but I think the claims of "cheating" people that others are seeing are a bit farfetched.

Envoyé par Thaladar_LOTRO

It was good to finally read some details about the Instance Finder. I know many players are violently opposed to the tool, but my group is actually looking forward to testing it out. Two questions that we have:

1. Will Hunters be able to select the Defense role? We have 5 hunters and would like the IF to match us up with a Healer. But according to the Dev Diary, at least one of us must select Defense - is this possible?
2. Will the IF tool know which Skirmishes/Instances are available for F2P/Premium players? If a F2P player is in the Fellowship when the Leader joins the IF, will it only put us into Gondamon or Tuckborough since those are the only ones the F2P player has access to?

1. No they wont. They can queue for DPS or support roles. I would ASSUME support role via CC (hehe) trait line.

2. The queue will try to put a group together that everyone has first, then it will start to widdle down the options if a F2P/Premium player doesn't have specific spaces available.

Envoyé par Pele_the_Wrym

I could have sworn that one of the BR forums had a blue name comment indicating that daily rewards were being wrapped back into the standard (non-IF) drop rates and that the IF bonus would be a true bonus on top of that. (i.e., 10 non-IF rift skirms is equivalent in rewards to 10 rift skirms with dailies before the update.) I can't find that comment so I might have imagined it. But anyways, if that is the case than I don't have a problem with the IF because I haven't lost anything with it being implemented, I can only gain by using it or stay the same by ignoring it.

If, however, the instance finder has truly replaced the daily rewards then I do have a serious semantic issue with this. The "bonus" then isn't anything that exceeds our current expectations for rewards, it is required to maintain those expectations. Look up bonus in a dictionary, I don't believe that you'll find a definition of bonus that references maintaining expectations. If that's the case, than so be it, but let's change the name to something accurate. How does "Baseline Reward Maintenance Incentive" sound? (After all, it is a new incentive that is required in order to maintain the current baseline of rewards.)

This is correct, sorta. The daily bonus has been folded into the spaces which you can run as many times as you want. However! Some spaces that are known to be 'fast' or 'farms' have had the 'reward' scaled back, with other spaces known to be 'long' or 'harder' have had their 'rewards' scaled up.

So you could very well run into a space you farm on live right now today and get an overall worse payout, likewise you could jump into a space you personally enjoy that may be a bit longer then others, with a higher payout then your used to.

**Edited to add**
These examples are given by using the currect instance join and NOT the bonus from Instance Finder. If you use the Instance Finder then even the 'farmed/fast' spaces will be even closer to what they were before, maybe even above. But the costs of getting the bonus via IF is of course, its random. For now.

Some items, Delving scrolls as an example, have had the mark costs increased several times over. While others, like sealed relics Empowerment scrolls and Raid armour sets have had the costs reduced by as much as 60%


Keep in mind that the only posts you'll see are QQ posts by ppl that are used to farming specific spaces and are unhappy with the pay out. This is intended, the faster spaces shouldn't pay out the exact same as the spaces that take twice as long.

You wont see the posts by ppl that are happy with the pay outs of the longer spaces.

Envoyé par Hipo

Keep in mind that the only posts you'll see are QQ posts by ppl that are used to farming specific spaces and are unhappy with the pay out.

Not quite fair, btw. e.g I've been running Rift (easy/quick end) and Icy Crevasse(harder end), because I still need rep in those regions. Thankfully almost done with rift rep, as while it is easy run listening to Golodir drone on about not being a ranger is tedious (and a good bio opportunity). But there are reasons other than laziness to pick certain skrims...

I won't use the instance finder. And that should be enough. But it isn't. This rollout affects how I prefer to play skirmishes - IE, not randomly. You've removed the daily bonuses from the instance join and put them on your random insances instead. The way I prefer to run skirmishes won't be as profitable now. I can opt-out, but doing so is effectively shooting myself in the foot.

Let me be clear, if you insist on taking away my ability to choose how I play, I will deprive you of the opportunity to choose for me.

I don't want to play the skirmishes YOU want me to play. I want to play the skirmishes I want to play - even if it is the same one over and over. And sure, I can still do that, but I won't be as efficient now.

You've created a solution that has no problem. I can't recall a single thread saying "I'm tired of being in control of what instances / skirmishes I pick. Please choose them for me!" I do, however, recall a LOT of threads asking for a group finder. Not an insance finder, a group finder. You've already said this tool doesn't address those concerns.

Here's some free advice for you: You can't force an experience on a player. You can force them to use a particular set of weapons and armor. You can force them to play the instances you want them to play. But you CAN'T force them to enjoy it or have fun while doing it. I don't know what makes you think you can.

It's like christmas morning, you think you've picked out the perfect gift for all of us. But now we're playing with the box it came in and totally ignoring the gift you selected. This happens to parents all over the world. The difference is that it seems like you're getting mad at us for playing with the box! So, you're going to punish all of us, take the box away and make us play with your carefully selected gift.

Why do you even care? How does it hurt the developers if players are allowed to do what they want, even if that is running the same skirmish or instance over and over. So what? As far as I can tell, it's nothing more than shameless self-promotion. You made these instances, you think they're really great and can't understand why no one runs them. So, instead of changing the instances to make them more desirable, you'll just force us to run them! Ta-dah, now the instances you made aren't going totally unused. Is there some sort of developer competition where the developer with the most frequently run instances wins? I mean seriously, why do you even care? I think this is more about "developer pride" than anything else. And if that's the case, I'd say this is the sort of pride that is most accurately characterized as "foolish pride".

So, you've been working on this idea since the middle of last year - and this is what you've got for us? This is what you've been doing with my money all this time? I don't like what you're doing with the funds I've given you. But I think I have a solution to that problem. I'm sure you can guess what it is.

By the way, why isn't bullroarer open? Why can't we all try this thing out? Why did it close so soon after opening the last time? You know, when a movie production company refuses to let critics see a movie before the movie opens it always means only one thing.

Can't wait to tell people basic things like how to enable voice chat, don't break cc, etc. It will be like starting the game over from scratch!

edit: Totally sarcasm but I actually do look forward to the challenge of teaching noobs to play.

Envoyé par Thornpaw

Can't wait to tell people basic things like how to enable voice chat, don't break cc, etc. It will be like starting the game over from scratch!

Since you can join the Instance Finder with a full group of your friends who presumably know these things, I can't see how this is a valid complaint/difference from current situation. Perhaps I'm missing your point? If you join a PUG now that may happen, if you use IF with a non-full group that may happen?

I think the Instance Finder may be a nice tool after it gets a few more features but currently here are my issues with it:

1. It ignores the ignore list. I have only a very few persons on my ignore list and they are there for a reason. So, if I would be popped into a group with one of these persons I either have the choice of playing with someone I have had an issue with or bailing on the group and leaving them struggling to find a replacement in GLFF.

2. Need the ability to pick which instance(s) you are willing to do. This should just be a tool to help you find a fellowship. I don't see why anything needs to be completely random. Why can't I tell it 3 or 4 instances I'm willing to do and see what it finds?

3. Bonuses directly tied to use of the Instance Finder. So, if I want to run a solo skirmish I have to take what the instance finder puts me in. I don't like that. Perhaps I just want to go run Protectors of Thorenhad because it is my favorite and I want to fire off the balistaes. Or maybe I just want to run Strike at Danenglor because it is super fast. Sure, I can still do that but then I won't get the bonus. Also, I'd love to know if the 'randomizer' it is going to use is actually going to work. Or will it just give me the same things over and over again because that is what is 'randomly' being selected? (i.e. instance quests - how many times have you exitted and entered an instance to swap out quests just to find you are being given the same one over and over again? Doesn't seem very random sometimes.)

4. I understand why you are trying to make this tool 'smart' and have it assign roles to each person. But there should be more selections here. What if I want to go run a 3 man instance with all dps? Who says we need a tank or a healer in every instance? Currently, the funnest time I have had doing School / library was with 3 champs. Also have done those with 3 hunters. I get why Turbine has done it this way but there needs to be more options here. Maybe it could come back and let everyone know what it did find and then let each player decide if they are willing to give it a go?

5. What happens if you are looking for a fellowship and the Instance Finder can't find one of the 'required' roles? Lets say we have a Champ in a dps role but then no one in the tank position or vice versa. We all know the instance could probably still be done. What happens in a scenario like this? I'm assuming that one character can't fill two roles as far as the instance finder is concerned so the group would be a 'no go'? This goes along with what I said above....perhaps it should come back and let everyone know what it did find and then let each player decide if they are willing to give it a go?

6. Instance Finder needs to have the ability to search across servers. This isn't such a big deal on heavily populated / active servers but on some servers (Firefoot) it can be really hard to find a group at times. Been a bit better since the expansion but that won't last. Just make sure that when you implement this feature that you get it right the first time. I'd really hate to be put into a group with persons on another server and then have my character end up in a black hole because the game crashed to desktop or just couldn't figure out what server to return me to. :-). Fellowship chat needs to be working across the servers while in group as well.

7. Just my opinion, but I think this is being released now before it is really ready in order to 'test' it in live since obviously there are more people there and it's probably really hard to do proper testing in Beta. But, with that said, I think releasing it now is only going to cause people not to like it because it doesn't have the functionality that most people want. I have a feeling that the Instance Finder in it's current state is going to be more of an irritation than help.

8. Again this is just my opinion but I would have prefered to see Lotro spend their funding on fixing current issues in the game (i.e. Crashes to desktop that many are still experiencing....Yes I know people can contact tech support but since so many are having issues. I think this is an area that they should have spent some money on ). Fix current bugs (i.e Soldier Warrior Stupidity for another example) before they come out with something new that is going to be half done at best when it is released.

Envoyé par Wilksie

It never ceases to amaze me the amount of anger people feel towards an OPTIONAL tool being rolled out. If you disagree with it, don't use it why waste time and effort moaning about something that doesn't have to have an effect on you at all?

The way I understand it is that it is only 'optional' if you don't care about getting the bonuses. If it's the bonuses you are after it is not optional at all.

Envoyé par Crispian

A thought that has crossed my mind is what happens when member(s) of the fellowship do not have access to the instance in question - because they are not VIP or have not otherwise purchased it? My best guess is that the system does not filter out people who do not have it - because it's valuable to nudge people toward buying it and it does not seem like the system is sophisticated enough to account for it. But please correct me if this has already been addressed.

You will never be placed into an instance that you can't run in Instance Join. So, a person who hasn't purchased a particular instance isn't eligible to be put together with a person who did to do that instance. If you start out with a pre-made fellowship - when you enter IF, the system will figure out all the instances you have in common, and start looking for others who have some instances in common with that. If there are no instances that are in common within the premade fellowship, you'll be unable to join to begin with.

Envoyé par Thaladar_LOTRO

1. Will Hunters be able to select the Defense role? We have 5 hunters and would like the IF to match us up with a Healer. But according to the Dev Diary, at least one of us must select Defense - is this possible?

Hunters will not be able to select the Defense role. If you want to run an instance with 5 hunters and a minstrel, you'll have to put together your fellowship by other means - then you can use IF to select a random instance for you and play through it with a bonus. A group with just the 5 hunters won't be able to join IF.

Envoyé par Thaladar_LOTRO

2. Will the IF tool know which Skirmishes/Instances are available for F2P/Premium players? If a F2P player is in the Fellowship when the Leader joins the IF, will it only put us into Gondamon or Tuckborough since those are the only ones the F2P player has access to?

See above - you will be limited to the encounters that all members in your fellowship own, just as now with IJ.

Envoyé par Thornpaw

Can't wait to tell people basic things like how to enable voice chat, don't break cc, etc. It will be like starting the game over from scratch!

edit: Totally sarcasm but I actually do look forward to the challenge of teaching noobs to play.

I agree those things are annoying but those occur now in PUGs so I don't see any real difference here.

Envoyé par asearchforreason

Pointless question. There are very few systems that everyone uses.

I didn't say everyone. I said large chunk. If you're going to quote me, then respond to what you are quoting.

A large chunk - lots of people in endgame oriented kinships will avoid this like the plague. When others see how the loopholes will be abused, they will return to GLFF.

Others will use it. But this is being touted as a significant new thing. And it is. But when other significant pieces of the game have been waiting for updates for like forever, like housing and kinships, and the long rumored final stage of the LI revamp, kind of sucks that they decide to go with this hot mess instead.

Envoyé par Zombie_Columbus

Indeed, and that Blue was me!
[*]Marks - The Instance Finder bonus now provides these bonus Marks..

Question - since the Instance Finder only has a limited amount of instances to choose from, doesn't that mean that bonuses have effectively been removed from the game except where the new instance cluster is concerned?

Envoyé par Pele_the_Wrym

I could have sworn that one of the BR forums had a blue name comment indicating that daily rewards were being wrapped back into the standard (non-IF) drop rates and that the IF bonus would be a true bonus on top of that. (i.e., 10 non-IF rift skirms is equivalent in rewards to 10 rift skirms with dailies before the update.)

Indeed, and that Blue was me!

The Daily quests in Skirmishes gave 3 distinct rewards: XP, Marks and Reputation. These 3 rewards are being redistributed as such:

• XP - All monster kills in Skirmishes have had their XP amounts increased (and now, also Item XP!)
• Marks - The Instance Finder bonus now provides these bonus Marks.
• Reputation - Every time you complete the Skirmish you will be granted Reputation, it is no longer "Daily".

There will be a Currency dev diary coming out later (no promises when, translations take time) that will talk about this and other issues more.

Envoyé par Pele_the_Wrym

I could have sworn that one of the BR forums had a blue name comment indicating that daily rewards were being wrapped back into the standard (non-IF) drop rates and that the IF bonus would be a true bonus on top of that. (i.e., 10 non-IF rift skirms is equivalent in rewards to 10 rift skirms with dailies before the update.) I can't find that comment so I might have imagined it. But anyways, if that is the case than I don't have a problem with the IF because I haven't lost anything with it being implemented, I can only gain by using it or stay the same by ignoring it.

If, however, the instance finder has truly replaced the daily rewards then I do have a serious semantic issue with this. The "bonus" then isn't anything that exceeds our current expectations for rewards, it is required to maintain those expectations. Look up bonus in a dictionary, I don't believe that you'll find a definition of bonus that references maintaining expectations. If that's the case, than so be it, but let's change the name to something accurate. How does "Baseline Reward Maintenance Incentive" sound? (After all, it is a new incentive that is required in order to maintain the current baseline of rewards.)

That probably was my post as I was running and comparing various rewards/costs between current live system and the most recent update on BR (i.e. 10 runs of Rift Skirmish for a SoGE). It is true that the SM incentive of the daily bonus to run more than a single skirmish repeatedly has moved from daily quests to a 1.5x bonus. There are pros and cons to the incentive, such as IF there is no choice but the bonus is a % bonus so it will be proportional to the marks earned and not be unbalanced for the shortest skirmishes among others.

The currency changes (from barter costs to rewards in every skirmish/instance) have the biggest impact on where things will end up in terms of time/rewards/cost with the impact of the IF 1.5x and we'll most likely have to wait until it launches to see where it will end up. As I've stated before, from various things I've seen I'm hopeful, but everything can change

Envoyé par Deusdictum

I got the impression that it was one person's side project that he did on his own in addition to his normal work. When it got to a certain point it became an official project that occupied maybe 20%-30% of a few other people's time and 50%+ of his.

If this is the case, then here is my problem with it - If someone in my office was working on a project of his own choosing instead of fixing problems with work that had already been done I would take issue with that. They would be sat down and asked why they thought they had the time to work on an 'instance finder' when there other issues in the game that needed attention. Quality comes first, then quantity. Finish one project and get it working correctly before you start another. There are many issues in the current game that need attention and I didn't see anything in the notes of Update 5 that mention them.

Envoyé par Zombie_Columbus

Indeed, and that Blue was me!

I could have sworn that one of the BR forums had a blue name comment indicating that daily rewards were being wrapped back into the standard (non-IF) drop rates and that the IF bonus would be a true bonus on top of that.

The Daily quests in Skirmishes gave 3 distinct rewards: XP, Marks and Reputation. These 3 rewards are being redistributed as such:

• XP - All monster kills in Skirmishes have had their XP amounts increased (and now, also Item XP!)
• Marks - The Instance Finder bonus now provides these bonus Marks.
• Reputation - Every time you complete the Skirmish you will be granted Reputation, it is no longer "Daily".

There will be a Currency dev diary coming out later (no promises when, translations take time) that will talk about this and other issues more.

Either i dont understand or either you dont understand each other ZC !

But answering to this ZC you only speak of Instance Finder it seems.

So what did you do :
- put the daily quest package back into the Join instance as well as marks and rep or not ?

- and added a bonus to Instance finder ?


Sorry but i am lost on that one

Envoyé par Rouven

I like it!

As it seems you understand what ZC speak about can you explain it please ?

Daily are back into Instance Join as well as rep and ixp or not ?

Envoyé par Lizzi123

If this is the case, then here is my problem with it - If someone in my office was working on a project of his own choosing instead of fixing problems with work that had already been done I would take issue with that. They would be sat down and asked why they thought they had the time to work on an 'instance finder' when there other issues in the game that needed attention. Quality comes first, then quantity. Finish one project and get it working correctly before you start another. There are many issues in the current game that need attention and I didn't see anything in the notes of Update 5 that mention them.

Once again, there are myriad concerns being raised about the issue. I happen to like this one best. Though it may not accurately reflect the RL happenstance, the issue remains that there is so much more that could have been addressed than creating a "solution" that didn't really have a problem.

Two things I myself would like to point out:
a) this has actually been "advertised" by blue as an easy means of finding/filling out a group. If that is the case, why will there be an option to choose a solo instance?

b) If cross-server ever happens, what about names? Are toon names game-wide reserved, or server-reserved? If there are three Abiyahs available for a group that can fill all three roles needed, and all three are really good at it, that group won't happen, will it?

Envoyé par Zombie_Columbus

Indeed, and that Blue was me!

The Daily quests in Skirmishes gave 3 distinct rewards: XP, Marks and Reputation. These 3 rewards are being redistributed as such:

• XP - All monster kills in Skirmishes have had their XP amounts increased (and now, also Item XP!)
• Marks - The Instance Finder bonus now provides these bonus Marks.
• Reputation - Every time you complete the Skirmish you will be granted Reputation, it is no longer "Daily".

There will be a Currency dev diary coming out later (no promises when, translations take time) that will talk about this and other issues more.

I like it!

Envoyé par Hipo

You can queue up for as many roles as you can fill. Capt can fill any of the roles, so they can queue up for all four at once, the queue will then place them in the role they have been asigned.



Did you honestly expect a couple dozen over dramatic forum users to threaten Turbine into submission?

The vast majority of players are actually playing and not crying in the forums. The IF is going to be used a ton-The QQ will die down and even some of the dramatic players will come around. I've seen it twice before.

Like clockwork.

I've seen something else implemented too that a large portion of the player base (and by the way, read that thread, its more than just a few dozen people who are outraged with this joke) did not want... Can you guess what it was called?

Radiance. The idea of Rad was great. It was poorly designed, poorly implemented, and never updated like it was supposed to have been. They lost their way with it and never could bring it back to a non-gating issue.

Point being, the IF is poorly designed, its going to be poorly implemented, and we will more than likely never see an update to it (just like radiance).

Go ahead and deny a trend that you don't see happening. It's been going on for years now. They start something and never finish. It's becoming a "calling card". Soon their slogan won't be "powered by players", its going to be "Start, but never finish".

Envoyé par Marguerita

Either i dont understand or either you dont understand each other ZC !

But answering to this ZC you only speak of Instance Finder it seems.

So what did you do :
- put the daily quest package back into the Join instance as well as marks and rep or not ?

- and added a bonus to Instance finder ?


Sorry but i am lost on that one

I don't exactly understand what is confusing you, so I'll just explain a different way...

The Daily Quests are gone.

However, we've increased the rewards (XP, IXP and Rep) in all Skirmishes and introduced a Mark bonus though IF. The net effect should be that, if you you use IF when playing Skirmishes, you will be awarded as much or more then when using the old Dailies

Envoyé par Lizzi123

If this is the case, then here is my problem with it - If someone in my office was working on a project of his own choosing instead of fixing problems with work that had already been done I would take issue with that. They would be sat down and asked why they thought they had the time to work on an 'instance finder' when there other issues in the game that needed attention.

You need to bear in mind that the people working on this may not be the people working on what issues you think need fixing. Its not cost effective have the person fixing an issue spend a month getting someone up to speed on their issue rather than fixing it themselves.

Further, there tends to be huge amounts of downtime in projects like this where your waiting for your fix to be complied, then clear internal testing, exclusive testing and open testing - a lot of work upon 'polishing' projects like the Instances finder will almost certainly get done in that time. (Indeed, in my experience, a lot of gets done in time that people are not even being paid for).

Envoyé par Jadrax

You need to bear in mind that the people working on this may not be the people working on what issues you think need fixing. Its not cost effective have the person fixing an issue spend a month getting someone up to speed on their issue rather than fixing it themselves.

Further, there tends to be huge amounts of downtime in projects like this where your waiting for your fix to be complied, then clear internal testing, exclusive testing and open testing - a lot of work upon 'polishing' projects like the Instances finder will almost certainly get done in that time. (Indeed, in my experience, a lot of gets done in time that people are not even being paid for).

By what you say, that also means that those fixes, should they have been ready to internal test/exclusive test/open test, have been pushed back (or even dropped by the way-side) by a finder that quite a few people do not want.

As to this program being half baked, sometimes you get to a point where you can't do any more in the lab, and you just gotta fire some rockets to see how they work.

Envoyé par Zombie_Columbus

I don't exactly understand what is confusing you, so I'll just explain a different way...

The Daily Quests are gone.

However, we've increased the rewards (XP, IXP and Rep) in all Skirmishes and introduced a Mark bonus though IF. The net effect should be that, if you you use IF when playing Skirmishes, you will be awarded as much or more then when using the old Dailies

Well that's poor... What if people do things in a kin/friends/known players. That shows that this isn't the way you like things done?

I avoid a lot of poor players, I don't hide it. People know it. I just think that if a player isn't going to bother making a half-decent character like everyone else does then why bother coming to a raid.

Envoyé par Zombie_Columbus

The net effect should be that, if you you use IF when playing Skirmishes, you will be awarded as much or more then when using the old Dailies

Which means we'll be awarded less compared to now if we don't use the IF?

Envoyé par MashtaJurioz

Well that's poor... What if people do things in a kin/friends/known players. That's means that isn't rewarded as well?

You can go into IF with a ready-made group. e.g. you can go in with a 6 man fellow with your kin/friends/know players, and will get a random 6 man instance with those people...

Envoyé par Longfeellow

By what you say, that also means that those fixes, should they have been ready to internal test/exclusive test/open test, have been pushed back by a finder that quite a few people do not want.

The only one it will hold back is the open test (Bullroarer), and I have not seen any of these fixes make it that far.

Bug testing is an utter time consuming nightmare, I once ran a project that spent 2 years just trying to fix one bug in a payroll system - it required 7 different agencies in total, and only god knows how many individuals ended up being involved in total.

Envoyé par DickerHund

Which means we'll be awarded less compared to now if we don't use the IF?

Yes. But no, that probably won't be admitted.

Envoyé par Jadrax

The only one it will hold back is the open test (Bullroarer), and I have not seen any of these fixes make it that far.

Bug testing is an utter time consuming nightmare, I once ran a project that spent 2 years just trying to fix one bug in a payroll system - it required 7 different agencies in total, and only god knows how many individuals ended up being involved in total.

So what you're saying is, what is actually broken and needs fixing, takes a back seat to what isn't broken and doesn't need fixing or replacing?

Because by the way you describe it, that is what Turbine is deciding to do with their "fixes" vs. "nuuu c00l shiniez dat we want u 2 play wif". The fixes take a back seat to the implementation of what isn't necessarily needed.

/boggle

I don't understand. And I'm not trying to attack you personally, but that just doesn't make any sense. I'm not a computer programmer, I don't develope software or video games. That is far beyond my reach in mental powers that I just do not possess. But I am a fairly logical person, and there is literally zero logic in that statement.