Thread: Star-lit Crystas and the End of the Loot Incentive to Raid Orthanc Tier 2?

I think there is a consensus among the hard-core raiders that Orthanc tier 2 itemization is poor, as there is very little in it that is measurably superior to items obtained elsewhere with the sole, conspicuous exception of the First Ager. But now that the new Star-lit Crystals are almost completely obliterating gap between a First Ager and a Second Ager, I am led to beg a question:

WHY RAID ORTHANC TIER 2 AT ALL FROM A LOOT PERSPECTIVE?

Now, I want to put the obligatory disclaimer that many (including myself) raid end-game content for reasons other than simply loot--whether they be overcoming challenges or camaraderie developed within the group or whatever else that makes us get up in the morning. But the unvarnished truth is that obtaining the gear that stands out is one of the central reasons to raid for almost all; in fact, it is the fundamental, primary reason for perhaps the majority.

So why completely get rid of the pivotal loot incentive to raid most difficult end-game content?

Perhaps the most logical answer is that end-game raiding segment in LOTRO is so infinitesimally small that Turbine can profitably ignore that segment completely and direct its attention to solely gratifying the non-raiding masses. But I would like to summon the hidden optimist in me and search for an alternative explanation. Will the benefits accrued from the Star-lit Crystals proportionally increase for First Agers in the long-run as well? Or will other Orthanc tier 2 gear be improved to counter-balance the sudden obsolescence of the First Ager?

I know that we do not want the type of gear grind and in-built elitist scheme of earlier MMORPGs like Everquest; but at the same token, I would not want Tolkien's vision transmogrified into a Marxist one where everyone does the same DPS either!

Edit:

People have responded that you can slot the Crystals on the First Ager as well. But the Crystals dramatically increase stats for Second and Third Agers, whereas their effects on First Agers is apparently negligible--that is, the Crystals do not increase stats equally for all three tiers of LI.

If I'm not mistaken the first agers have star-lit crystal slots too! So the gap between first and second agers is the same as always.

I didn't see anything to say you can't put these crystals on a first-ager as well, so a 2nd age with crystals may be close to a 1st age without crystals, but a 1st age with crystals is going to be much better.

Originally Posted by dumasroxx

If I'm not mistaken the first agers have star-lit crystal slots too! So the gap between first and second agers is the same as always.

Yes, but folks in the test server have posted that they do not increase stats (esp. DPS) proportionally.

Originally Posted by dumasroxx

If I'm not mistaken the first agers have star-lit crystal slots too! So the gap between first and second agers is the same as always.

Unless things have changed from BR to Live, you are greatly, greatly mistaken. Please inform yourself before posting.

Originally Posted by MajUntagent

so crystals from a (dual wielding) champ's point of view:

Putting crystals in a FA only increases it a couple percent, compared to bringing a SA within spitting distance of FA DPS. However, crystals do not turn a SA into a FA, as the SA will still have limited points to spend on legacies.

Note, T2 Orthanc has never had loot incentive, you can simply get a cloak clasp from T1 and trade it for a WSotEK.

People do T2 for the challenge, the fun, and pride--none of which come from loot. They do it again for fun and the challenge and the pride of being able to repeat their achievement (despite already having procured any loot).



"Sometimes survival comes down to not being hit. Actually, most times." -the chicken skill, Bob and Weave

The gap between Second and First Ages is closer than before when both have full crystals. However, First Ages are still the best (more points, more rating). I believe having the "best" will still be a main incentive, even if not as big as before.

Plus the jewelry isn't too shabby, have you seen some of the 134 agility bracelets? Guaranteed (I think) cloak clasps on T2 rather than the coin flip T1 farm. Who knows what drops from Saruman T2C.

Correct the 1st age weapons have 3 slots, but the about that they increase dps or healing is very nerfed.

Originally Posted by atbuff_06

I just see this as another grind to the already biggest grind in game. After doing a little testing with the crystals tonight on BR I really wonder if it's even worth it for DPS classes. For DPS classes with 1st age weapons the crystals do almost nothing.

I compared a 1st age bow to a 2nd age bow.

2nd age bow dps (no crystals): 137.9 DPS, 215- 392 dmg
2nd age bow dps w/ 3 crystals: 148.2 DPS, 231-421 dmg
An increase of 10.3 DPS.

1st age bow dps (no crystals): 149.7 DPS, 234-425 dmg
1st age bow dps w/ 3 crystals: 152.0 DPS, 237-431 dmg
An increase of 2.3 DPS.

Why is the increase in DPS almost 5x more for a 2nd age item over a 1st age item?

This is what the op is trying to point out. when you end up with a weapon thats not even 3% better why bother.

Originally Posted by Nicepants42

Unless things have changed from BR to Live, you are greatly, greatly mistaken. Please inform yourself before posting.

Greatly mistaken? As far as I know BR is for testing and you don't know if they changed it either? I just pointed out that the difference should be the same. Please wait till it goes live before assuming it's unchanged.

Originally Posted by Miretocot

, I would not want Tolkien's vision transmogrified into a Marxist one where everyone does the same DPS either!

On a side track, Tolkien's vision had very little to do with material things or gear. Except for a few items (sting, mithril armor, a few swords), the abilities of the protagonists had to do with internal fortitude, will, etc... I dont recall any or the heroes going on raids to get better things. To me going on raids to get better items for one's own purpose is the ultimate anti-Tolkien, and though I love this game, do struggle with at times.

I know its a game, so no issue with Turbine's implementation and understand the OPs point, but it seems excessive to use Tolkien's vision.

Higher DPS and other bonuses, and more points to spend. Because they closed the ever-widening gap between 2nd and 1st Ages, people are going to stop raiding? I think the opposite. As T2 becomes easier (with SlCs), more people will be capable of doing T2.

I'm sure you're right about Turbine not needing to please the hardcore raiders, since they themselves have rendered that group so small.

Of course, I'm of the opinion that it's already enough of a benefit for hardcore raiders to get their gear first, more quickly, more easily, more frequently, and with fewer people to roll against, not to mention getting to use their winnings for longer than anyone else before they become obsolete. But no matter how much anyone has, they'll always want more, so this type of thread is entirely unsurprising.

A lot of people play to get gear and see their characters progress. You're right in that the narrowing of the gap between SAs and FAs via crystals could make some people say "Ok, I'm done, cya when RoR drops!" or (less dramatically) turn to alts.

But still others want the best. That means FAs and gold necklaces and shimmering cloaks. I want the best. I play because I like raiding and instancing (I'll run Foundry over and over with a good group, because efficiently stomping NPCs entertains me; I still have a dream to Capt-tank more than F&F T1). But, I also like progressing and building my character; with one FA already I see a self-imposed finish line ahead for my Capt. And surely there's a significant chunk of raiders (yourself included) that are driven by one of the two reasons that I am.

I also think you're greatly exaggerating the difference between FA+++'s and SA+++'s that we've seen on Bullroarer. Discounting better top stats and more points and all that, there's a straight DPS difference of 8.5% between FA and SA 2handers. That difference narrows to 2.5% raw DPS between FA+++ and SA+++ 2handers. Now start thinking about those extra points and those bigger rating legs again. It sucks that its not proportional, but FA's still come out ahead. 2.5% straight DPS (not 2.5% more mastery) + more points is still a relatively big increase for a single piece of equipment.

Originally Posted by dumasroxx

Greatly mistaken? As far as I know BR is for testing and you don't know if they changed it either? I just pointed out that the difference should be the same. Please wait till it goes live before assuming it's unchanged.

Ah, so we can't draw any inferences from the code that has already been released, but can instead make unfounded claims about how things should be based on how each of us feels it should be. Qualify it with 'unless I am mistaken' and our posts become unassailable, even with similarly qualified posts.

I understand now.

Oh great, MORE items to keep me way behind the 8-ball

Originally Posted by Miretocot

I think there is a consensus among the hard-core raiders that Orthanc tier 2 itemization is poor, as there is very little in it that is measurably superior to items obtained elsewhere with the sole, conspicuous exception of the First Ager.

Every single piece of Orthanc loot is more powerful than anything you can get anywhere else, exclusing the LG pieces maybe and the Draigoch cloak. The problem people have is with the poor choice of distribution of this power magnitude (i.e., the amount of armor pieces, or the choice of putting will on a captain shield, or slapping a good measure of +power on pretty much all there is). The cloaks are VERY nice for example, but get marginalized completely by Draigoch cloaks except for special applications.

Orthanc misses the fun loot, it misses variation through shared loottables of the lower rings, and the sensical distribution of stats on many pieces (and champion loot altogether). It is still very powerful, and its not all about the first ager.

Perhaps the most logical answer is that end-game raiding segment in LOTRO is so infinitesimally small that Turbine can profitably ignore that segment completely and direct its attention to solely gratifying the non-raiding masses.

That is pretty illogical.
If I actually wanted to cut costs, I wouldnt have made special raiding loot in the first place. I would have taken the available stuff and created a fractionally more powerful "Greater Ring of lasting Victory" for example. Incidentally, thats not a bad idea and Turbine has already done it with the purple loot from RoF T1 and T2.

The simple truth is, RockX made a self-admitted mess of it. But there´s not really a greater obvious agenda at work.

But I would like to summon the hidden optimist in me and search for an alternative explanation. Will the benefits accrued from the Star-lit Crystals proportionally increase for First Agers in the long-run as well? Or will other Orthanc tier 2 gear be improved to counter-balance the sudden obsolescence of the First Ager?

[...]
People have responded that you can slot the Crystals on the First Ager as well. But the Crystals dramatically increase stats for Second and Third Agers, whereas their effects on First Agers is apparently negligible--that is, the Crystals do not increase stats equally for all three tiers of LI.

You make it sound as if First agers are obsolete. They are not. They are still, without any crystal, noticeably stronger and more customizable than any second ager. And that is the only relevant thing.
It appears to me that the crystals are at least in part a reaction to the botched power difference between the ages with RoI. Have a look at DPS progression of 2handed weapons at level 65:
3rd age:___65.3__to__81.3
2nd age:_____67.9__to__84.5
1st age:________69.7__to__88.9

Now, DPS on lvl 75 2handers:
3rd age:___107__->__118 (?)
2nd age:___________115_____->_____137,9
1st age:__________________________ __________145.2 -> 149.7

That is hardly normal.

I thought the general consensus in the comparable incomparables/raid vs solo discussions over the years was that raid gear should be better than non-raid gear, but not by a whole lot, and that raid gear should help you raid while non-raid gear should help you do your solo pie delivery quests or whatever. Isn't that still the case?

It seems to me they're making more avenues for non-raiders to improve their gear (and for raiders to also improve it too, just by slightly less) with considerable effort.

So your DPS is now better by ~3 instead of ~13. Afraid I'm missing the travesty here.

Originally Posted by Beastnas

Who knows what drops from Saruman T2C.

We all do, it's all in the Lorebook.

Originally Posted by Miretocot

many (including myself) raid end-game content for reasons other than simply loot

uh huh

Originally Posted by Miretocot

obtaining the gear that stands out is one of the central reasons to raid for almost all; in fact, it is the fundamental, primary reason for perhaps the majority.

Then let them post their complaints. If you aren't playing for loot, then you should be AGAINST gear inflation since it trivializes the challenge of the encounters.

Originally Posted by Vandervahn

Every single piece of Orthanc loot is more powerful than anything you can get anywhere else, exclusing the LG pieces maybe and the Draigoch cloak.

It appears that you seem to have missed my repeated emphasis on TIER TWO, not Orthanc as a whole. Tier 1 is hardly a challenge when skilled folks can 6-man it.

Originally Posted by Vandervahn

That is pretty illogical.
If I actually wanted to cut costs, I wouldnt have made special raiding loot in the first place.

No, if you did that, then the vast majority of raiders wouldn't even look at the game.

Originally Posted by Vandervahn

You make it sound as if First agers are obsolete. They are not. They are still, without any crystal, noticeably stronger and more customizable than any second ager. And that is the only relevant thing.

There is of course a bit of exaggeration in my original post. But to your claim that the minor advantage gained from First Ager now over the Second Ager is significant enough to make the remaining difference "relevant" is itself highly contestable.

Well, given that the Great River off-hand Dagger, Sword, and Axe all lost a significant amount of either crit or physical mastery, the ToO off-hands are looking better again. (The Axe from Shadow always looked good, but we've never seen it drop, so... yeah.)

Originally Posted by Anisson

Correct the 1st age weapons have 3 slots, but the about that they increase dps or healing is very nerfed.

This is what the op is trying to point out. when you end up with a weapon thats not even 3% better why bother.

I wasn't aware of this - just assumed the increase on 1st age would be as good as 2nd age, I mean why would you code it differently? Does seem silly to me that you can get a 2nd age dps close to a 1st age.

Originally Posted by Lestache

Well, given that the Great River off-hand Dagger, Sword, and Axe all lost a significant amount of either crit or physical mastery, the ToO off-hands are looking better again. (The Axe from Shadow always looked good, but we've never seen it drop, so... yeah.)

Wait...what? Say it isn't so

If it is, at least I kept my Pits T2 axe in the vault.