Glorious Alpha Two Testers!

Alpha Two Phase II testing is currently taking place 5+ days each week. More information about testing schedule can be found here

If you have Alpha Two, you can download the game launcher here, and we encourage you to join us on our Official Discord Server for the most up to date testing news.

Of 40 player Instanced Raiding and 40 player Pvp, which requires the most skill?

13»

Comments

  • DygzDygz Member, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
    akabear wrote: »
    As the OP, I proposed this discussion to lead on to where then might the monster coin events fit.

    Are they pve raid or pvp considering the mob is controlled by a player and as such, where do players see the complexity / difficulty of these "raid" vs other AI raids?
    Monster Coin Attacks are objective-based PvX.
    Part of this calculation is not simply killing the monsters, it's also defending the objectives.
    Will it be easier or more challenging to defend the objectives against AI or against players?
    Players driving monsters will be directed to complete objectives, so killing players may not be the primary focus, destroying specific buildings/services is likely to be the focus... we'll have to see which provides more rewards.

    The PvP equivalent might be something more like a Caravan or Siege, where we're also factoring in strategic objectives rather than just focusing on player characters killing each other.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    Your numbers are assuming it's a comparison of 1 raid boss pull against 1 round of PvP.
    My numbers are taking in to account every pull a given guild would have against a top end raid boss (based on some assumptions), vs that same raid splitting in two and PvP'ing each other.

    If we want to take a single night of raiding vs a single night of PvP, if that night of raiding is at the start of attempting a new top end encounter, the success is zero. If we look at that same encounter a few months later, the success chance will be somewhere between 25% and 100%.

    The variation in this is why I opted to look over the span of time the encounter would expect to be relevant. Since the expectation with PvP is always 50/50, it doesn't really matter how long a time span we take.

    You could change this parameter and change the result, for sure.

    You could take your average of 25% and span that over a 16 pull night.
    0.75^16 gives 1% chance to not get a kill that night.

    That wouldn't reflect any individual raid night though and is not representative of raiding but it is using your numbers.
    I mean, you could do that, but the only reason you would is if you specifically wanted to change the result.
  • Littlekenny21Littlekenny21 Member
    edited May 2021
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    Your numbers are assuming it's a comparison of 1 raid boss pull against 1 round of PvP.
    My numbers are taking in to account every pull a given guild would have against a top end raid boss (based on some assumptions), vs that same raid splitting in two and PvP'ing each other.

    If we want to take a single night of raiding vs a single night of PvP, if that night of raiding is at the start of attempting a new top end encounter, the success is zero. If we look at that same encounter a few months later, the success chance will be somewhere between 25% and 100%.

    The variation in this is why I opted to look over the span of time the encounter would expect to be relevant. Since the expectation with PvP is always 50/50, it doesn't really matter how long a time span we take.

    You could change this parameter and change the result, for sure.

    You could take your average of 25% and span that over a 16 pull night.
    0.75^16 gives 1% chance to not get a kill that night.

    That wouldn't reflect any individual raid night though and is not representative of raiding but it is using your numbers.
    I mean, you could do that, but the only reason you would is if you specifically wanted to change the result.

    Or the reason would be to change to what I would believe to be more accurate success criteria.

    Either way, I don't think simple maths gives a meaningful result.
    In the PvP scenario, if both teams are bad it gives the same number
    In the raid scenario, if a new boss is released expanding on the mechanics of the first, the numbers would give the same result because the team would have already learned similar mechanics, even if fighting this boss without fighting the first would result in more time to get that first kill.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited May 2021
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    In the raid scenario, if a new boss is released expanding on the mechanics of the first, the numbers would give the same result because the team would have already learned similar mechanics
    I've never seen a top end raid encounter using the same mechanic from an earlier encounter. There are reasons I specifically said top end encounter right from the start.

    These are the encounters that introduce new mechanics, and those mechanics then get used on mid-range then low end raid encounters.

    Also, your alteration to the success criteria doesn't really fit, as you are only altering it with one activity.

    If you are going to average out the numbers over a 16 pull night, and make the claim that one kill equals success, you have to do that with PvP as well.

    Based on that, success would then have to be determined by how many times the activity would be expected to be initiated, on average, for a successful outcome. Since the ratio of success for PvE is still at 25% and PvP at 50%, I think the result here is obvious. Or you could determine the average chance of at least one success over a given number of events, which is what you previously did.

    Either way, as long as you do it with both, it is fine. Doing it with one and not the other is not fine, however.
  • Littlekenny21Littlekenny21 Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    In the raid scenario, if a new boss is released expanding on the mechanics of the first, the numbers would give the same result because the team would have already learned similar mechanics
    I've never seen a top end raid encounter using the same mechanic from an earlier encounter. There are reasons I specifically said top end encounter right from the start.

    These are the encounters that introduce new mechanics, and those mechanics then get used on mid-range then low end raid encounters.

    Also, your alteration to the success criteria doesn't really fit, as you are only altering it with one activity.

    If you are going to average out the numbers over a 16 pull night, and make the claim that one kill equals success, you have to do that with PvP as well.

    Based on that, success would then have to be determined by how many times the activity would be expected to be initiated, on average, for a successful outcome. Since the ratio of success for PvE is still at 25% and PvP at 50%, I think the result here is obvious. Or you could determine the average chance of at least one success over a given number of events, which is what you previously did.

    Either way, as long as you do it with both, it is fine. Doing it with one and not the other is not fine, however.

    True that top end encounters wouldn't reuse mechanics so that scenario is invalid.

    I believe the success criteria to be different between the two so you can't do the same to them both.

    For me, a single raid boss kill on a raid night would be a success but a PvP match with 5 wins 6 losses in a best of 10 is not a success.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    True that top end encounters wouldn't reuse mechanics so that scenario is invalid.

    I believe the success criteria to be different between the two so you can't do the same to them both.

    For me, a single raid boss kill on a raid night would be a success but a PvP match with 5 wins 6 losses in a best of 10 is not a success.
    Best of 10 in an MMO is a somewhat arbitrary determination. Arenas in games reward after each arena, not after a best of 10. Guild wars reward after each war. Sieges reward after each siege.

    I can't think of a single MMO that only rewards PvP in a best out of 10 scenario.
  • Littlekenny21Littlekenny21 Member
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    True that top end encounters wouldn't reuse mechanics so that scenario is invalid.

    I believe the success criteria to be different between the two so you can't do the same to them both.

    For me, a single raid boss kill on a raid night would be a success but a PvP match with 5 wins 6 losses in a best of 10 is not a success.
    Best of 10 in an MMO is a somewhat arbitrary determination. Arenas in games reward after each arena, not after a best of 10. Guild wars reward after each war. Sieges reward after each siege.

    I can't think of a single MMO that only rewards PvP in a best out of 10 scenario.

    My background is more in guild wars 2 WvWvW and not a standard structured or rewarded setting. On "raid" night we would go on the WvW maps as a guild group looking for other guild groups to fight and often would go away from all objectives ln the map to do best of X fights if there was a similar size guild around. The only reward here was knowing you won.

    There was also an unofficial GvG leaderboard for 15v15 and 20v20 but I don't remember what that was a best of.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    Noaani wrote: »
    Littlekenny21 wrote: »
    True that top end encounters wouldn't reuse mechanics so that scenario is invalid.

    I believe the success criteria to be different between the two so you can't do the same to them both.

    For me, a single raid boss kill on a raid night would be a success but a PvP match with 5 wins 6 losses in a best of 10 is not a success.
    Best of 10 in an MMO is a somewhat arbitrary determination. Arenas in games reward after each arena, not after a best of 10. Guild wars reward after each war. Sieges reward after each siege.

    I can't think of a single MMO that only rewards PvP in a best out of 10 scenario.

    My background is more in guild wars 2 WvWvW and not a standard structured or rewarded setting. On "raid" night we would go on the WvW maps as a guild group looking for other guild groups to fight and often would go away from all objectives ln the map to do best of X fights if there was a similar size guild around. The only reward here was knowing you won.

    There was also an unofficial GvG leaderboard for 15v15 and 20v20 but I don't remember what that was a best of.
    This is all well and good, but it is clearly setting your own success criteria.

    This would be akin to me setting the criteria of the raid to that of killing the encounter under a specific arbitrary time - it isn't required for actual success, but I can arbitrarily make that my success condition if I wish.
  • BiccusBiccus Member
    From my experience of raiding I found it’s almost entirely just learning a routine with little variety. I and others might be good at it but I’ve never really considered raiding in general skilful.
  • NoaaniNoaani Member, Intrepid Pack, Alpha Two
    edited May 2021
    Biccus wrote: »
    From my experience of raiding I found it’s almost entirely just learning a routine with little variety. I and others might be good at it but I’ve never really considered raiding in general skilful.
    Sounds like low to mid-range raiding to me.

    I am automatically assuming that is what your experience is limited to, and I am also agreeing with you.
  • BlackheartedBlackhearted Member
    edited May 2021
    Lets assume we have 2 perfect identical teams (dream teams)
    Fight rules is tdm with time limit.
    Every PvPer there is so good that noone died.

    Does that count as 100% win rate or 0%?
    "You're seeking for perfection, but your disillusions are leading to destruction.
    You're bleeding for salvation, but you can't see that you are the damnation itself." -Norther
Sign In or Register to comment.