There's only so many resources that can make BiS and unless you just want recipes the rewards would be the same as elsewhere. It would be a very skimpy process. WoW progression sucks. The vertical nature of WoW sucks. If there is pve creep there will be pvp creep too and i don't want to lose the PvX nature.
Can totally have systems where BiS comes from both instanced difficult content only the smallest playerbase can complete, and also crafted, and have no vertical progression grind.
To lots of players, 'progression' means clearing one tier over and over to gear up, then the next tier using last tier gear, and repeat forever. (This sucks, its why wow is a bad game, and nostalgia is the only thing keeping players there.)
When we hear words said that "this content only <10% of players can do", progression should mean, a team has managed to complete 30% of the fight, and then some time later, have progressed to complete 35% of the fight, because it is that difficult. We are talking about less than a few hundred people capable of clearing per 10,000 player server.
If there was gear loot at the end, if its BiS gear, then that means its equivalent in power to what the best crafters can make, since the wiki already states the best stuff comes from crafting. Maybe it looks a heck of a lot better or cooler or unique than the crafted stuff. Maybe its easier to enchant, maybe its purely cosmetic even with no stats. Who knows, I dont care actually, I just like challenging raids that take several weeks or even longer to figure out and clear with a very talented team.
I wouldnt worry about power or gear scaling being based on raids since that is against the stated design of this game. Which gives me more time to explore all the parts of the game in between expansions, rather than purely focus on raiding, thats a good thing.
What I do worry about, is when I hear it said over and over that the highest challenge in the game is open world bosses. Because those, in most games, are really, really easy to kill. So what if other players can add lots of mayhem to the encounter, the boss design of open world bosses is usually really not that hard. The difficulty comes completely from the PvX part of the fight. Which is why when the OP says "What role should instanced dungeons play in aoc", I want to reply with "The most challenging PvE"
There's only so many resources that can make BiS and unless you just want recipes the rewards would be the same as elsewhere. It would be a very skimpy process. WoW progression sucks. The vertical nature of WoW sucks. If there is pve creep there will be pvp creep too and i don't want to lose the PvX nature.
Can totally have systems where BiS comes from both instanced difficult content only the smallest playerbase can complete, and also crafted, and have no vertical progression grind.
To lots of players, 'progression' means clearing one tier over and over to gear up, then the next tier using last tier gear, and repeat forever. (This sucks, its why wow is a bad game, and nostalgia is the only thing keeping players there.)
When we hear words said that "this content only <10% of players can do", progression should mean, a team has managed to complete 30% of the fight, and then some time later, have progressed to complete 35% of the fight, because it is that difficult. We are talking about less than a few hundred people capable of clearing per 10,000 player server.
If there was gear loot at the end, if its BiS gear, then that means its equivalent in power to what the best crafters can make, since the wiki already states the best stuff comes from crafting. Maybe it looks a heck of a lot better or cooler or unique than the crafted stuff. Maybe its easier to enchant, maybe its purely cosmetic even with no stats. Who knows, I dont care actually, I just like challenging raids that take several weeks or even longer to figure out and clear with a very talented team.
I wouldnt worry about power or gear scaling being based on raids since that is against the stated design of this game. Which gives me more time to explore all the parts of the game in between expansions, rather than purely focus on raiding, thats a good thing.
What I do worry about, is when I hear it said over and over that the highest challenge in the game is open world bosses. Because those, in most games, are really, really easy to kill. So what if other players can add lots of mayhem to the encounter, the boss design of open world bosses is usually really not that hard. The difficulty comes completely from the PvX part of the fight. Which is why when the OP says "What role should instanced dungeons play in aoc", I want to reply with "The most challenging PvE"
The bosses are Legendary World Bosses...I don't think you'll be able to defeat these bosses if you think you can cheese them, especially when PvP is happening at the same time. They are Horde Mode, Wave Defence, Legendary Mobs/Legendary Bosses which can annihilate 91 to 99% of the server player base. You can't zerg the legendary world bosses due to the zerg mechanics, you just have to send your elite raid team.
You can quote me on this after we start to see the first open world bosses. If they are actually tough to kill and take several weeks or more of prog to figure out all of the mechanics, then I will be entirely happy with them.
I never said anything about cheesing them, I said in most games, they are just boring. That means they have low effort mechanics to figure out.
You can quote me on this after we start to see the first open world bosses. If they are actually tough to kill and take several weeks or more of prog to figure out all of the mechanics, then I will be entirely happy with them.
I never said anything about cheesing them, I said in most games, they are just boring. That means they have low effort mechanics to figure out.
Its not the World Bosses you want to worry about. Its The Legendary World Bosses mate.
Steven said 'The instances are used for Story, Class and Racial Purposes. They are not designed to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.' That was 2 years ago.
Yes, that is the quote I was talking about as well.
They are not to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.
Not "they are single use only".
These are distinctly different statements. Steven said one, you are essentially claiming he said the other.
Why would you want to repeat a Class, Racial or Story Instance? That's all the PvE instances are for.
Except that isn't all they are for.
The notion that instances will only be for that content was from 2017/2018. Intrepid have since said that they now intend to use instances for other things, specifically stating that they have included the notion that instances would be used if the content designer wants to limit the people present for an encounter to a specific number.
This is what I meant earlier by the wiki having information from a range of periods of the games design, and the design intention has changed in that time.
Steven said 'The instances are used for Story, Class and Racial Purposes. They are not designed to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.' That was 2 years ago.
Yes, that is the quote I was talking about as well.
They are not to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.
Not "they are single use only".
These are distinctly different statements. Steven said one, you are essentially claiming he said the other.
Why would you want to repeat a Class, Racial or Story Instance? That's all the PvE instances are for.
Except that isn't all they are for.
The notion that instances will only be for that content was from 2017/2018. Intrepid have since said that they now intend to use instances for other things, specifically stating that they have included the notion that instances would be used if the content designer wants to limit the people present for an encounter to a specific number.
This is what I meant earlier by the wiki having information from a range of periods of the games design, and the design intention has changed in that time.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content. Also, from march this year there will be specific types of raids in instances but only for some bosses. It was reiterated the game is not for everyone.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content.
You seem to not be focusing on the parts that are changing.
The notion that an instance may be limited to 8 players (a single group) isn't new information, that is the actual function of an instance. Saying that is some sort of new information is like saying the game will have PvP, but then following that up with "and you'll be able to attack other players as well" as "new information".
The part that changed isn't that instances will limit the number of players present. The part that changed is that the fact that instances do this has become a reason for a piece of content being instanced, where as before that was not the case.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
Yes, PvE in the open world will have tiered content. So what. Also, PvE instances are not currently planned to have tiers. That is what I said - but then I also said that tiered instances will eventually become part of the plan.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content.
You seem to not be focusing on the parts that are changing.
The notion that an instance may be limited to 8 players (a single group) isn't new information, that is the actual function of an instance. Saying that is some sort of new information is like saying the game will have PvP, but then following that up with "and you'll be able to attack other players as well" as "new information".
The part that changed isn't that instances will limit the number of players present. The part that changed is that the fact that instances do this has become a reason for a piece of content being instanced, where as before that was not the case.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
Yes, PvE in the open world will have tiered content. So what. Also, PvE instances are not currently planned to have tiers. That is what I said - but then I also said that tiered instances will eventually become part of the plan.
You missed some of my quote somehow. You can limit an instance to one person - seen it done many times. I didn't put it as new information, I said it was stated two years ago and meant you said it was new information. The point about tiered content in the open world means there's less point to have closed tier progression in instances. Steven said this year that the game is designed to be open world. Why would they do an expansion that isn't based on the same experience as the backers chose? Half the PvE players don't even want to play due to the sea/ocean change.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content.
You seem to not be focusing on the parts that are changing.
The notion that an instance may be limited to 8 players (a single group) isn't new information, that is the actual function of an instance. Saying that is some sort of new information is like saying the game will have PvP, but then following that up with "and you'll be able to attack other players as well" as "new information".
The part that changed isn't that instances will limit the number of players present. The part that changed is that the fact that instances do this has become a reason for a piece of content being instanced, where as before that was not the case.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
Yes, PvE in the open world will have tiered content. So what. Also, PvE instances are not currently planned to have tiers. That is what I said - but then I also said that tiered instances will eventually become part of the plan.
You missed some of my quote somehow. You can limit an instance to one person - seen it done many times.
Again, focusing on the wrong thing.
The point isn't the number of people it is limited to, the point is the fact that they have said the fact that it limits the number of people is a reason to use it.
You are trying to say instancing will be used for story purposes, Intrtepid have since said they will occasionally use it specifically because it limits the number of people present.
What this means - by actual definition - is that Intrepid will have some instances for the sake of them being instances.
Not many - but some. They won't drop best in slot items, but that isn't the point. The point is, they will exist to be their own content.
If you had have focused on what was being said instead of trying to run off on pointless tangents, you would have come to this understanding several pages back.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content.
You seem to not be focusing on the parts that are changing.
The notion that an instance may be limited to 8 players (a single group) isn't new information, that is the actual function of an instance. Saying that is some sort of new information is like saying the game will have PvP, but then following that up with "and you'll be able to attack other players as well" as "new information".
The part that changed isn't that instances will limit the number of players present. The part that changed is that the fact that instances do this has become a reason for a piece of content being instanced, where as before that was not the case.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
Yes, PvE in the open world will have tiered content. So what. Also, PvE instances are not currently planned to have tiers. That is what I said - but then I also said that tiered instances will eventually become part of the plan.
You missed some of my quote somehow. You can limit an instance to one person - seen it done many times.
Again, focusing on the wrong thing.
The point isn't the number of people it is limited to, the point is the fact that they have said the fact that it limits the number of people is a reason to use it.
You are trying to say instancing will be used for story purposes, Intrtepid have since said they will occasionally use it specifically because it limits the number of people present.
What this means - by actual definition - is that Intrepid will have some instances for the sake of them being instances.
If you had have focused on what was being said instead of trying to run off on pointless tangents, you would have come to this understanding several pages back.
Yeah I know that. That's the part of my other post you didn't quote...
Steven said 'The instances are used for Story, Class and Racial Purposes. They are not designed to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.' That was 2 years ago.
Yes, that is the quote I was talking about as well.
They are not to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.
Not "they are single use only".
These are distinctly different statements. Steven said one, you are essentially claiming he said the other.
Why would you want to repeat a Class, Racial or Story Instance? That's all the PvE instances are for.
Except that isn't all they are for.
The notion that instances will only be for that content was from 2017/2018. Intrepid have since said that they now intend to use instances for other things, specifically stating that they have included the notion that instances would be used if the content designer wants to limit the people present for an encounter to a specific number.
This is what I meant earlier by the wiki having information from a range of periods of the games design, and the design intention has changed in that time.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content. Also, from march this year there will be specific types of raids in instances but only for some bosses. It was reiterated the game is not for everyone.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Yes, the problem remains that you are using PvP examples when we are talking about instanced PvE content.
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Yes, the problem remains that you are using PvP examples when we are talking about instanced PvE content.
You are correct - that is the problem.
Would you like to fix that problem now?
No. I don't because I'm talking PvX and PvX Content. The 20% of the instances covers both PvP and PvE elements. Its not just a PvE sphere. Steven calls the PvX Players 'The Golden Cohort'.
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Yes, the problem remains that you are using PvP examples when we are talking about instanced PvE content.
You are correct - that is the problem.
Would you like to fix that problem now?
No. I don't because I'm talking PvX and PvX Content. The 20% of the instances covers both PvP and PvE elements. Its not just a PvE sphere. Steven calls the PvX Players 'The Golden Cohort'.
Again missing the point.
I'm not saying 20% of all content will be instanced PvE content. I've already said that is an incredibly high percent (I honestly don't expect 20% of the game over all to be instanced - that would feel like a mostly instanced game).
What I am saying - what I have been saying this whole discussion with you, what I have been saying since 2018 - is that PvE instancing will exist in Ashes that is seperate from the story based instancing that Intrepid talked about a long time ago.
They will have PvE instances for the sake of that content being instanced.
Not a lot of it - but some of it.
All the other bullshit you have been talking abot (apartments, sieges, PvP, arenas et al) is literally all you missing the point - whether unwittingly or purposefully.
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Yes, the problem remains that you are using PvP examples when we are talking about instanced PvE content.
You are correct - that is the problem.
Would you like to fix that problem now?
No. I don't because I'm talking PvX and PvX Content. The 20% of the instances covers both PvP and PvE elements. Its not just a PvE sphere. Steven calls the PvX Players 'The Golden Cohort'.
Again missing the point.
I'm not saying 20% of all content will be instanced PvE content. I've already said that is an incredibly high percent (I honestly don't expect 20% of the game over all to be instanced - that would feel like a mostly instanced game).
What I am saying - what I have been saying this whole discussion with you, what I have been saying since 2018 - is that PvE instancing will exist in Ashes that is seperate from the story based instancing that Intrepid talked about a long time ago.
They will have PvE instances for the sake of that content being instanced.
Not a lot of it - but some of it.
All the other bullshit you have been talking abot (apartments, sieges, PvP, arenas et al) is literally all you missing the point - whether unwittingly or purposefully.
Clearly you haven't read all of my posts because I said bosses will be instanced to Nikr. Between Nikr and I we discussed the story instances then you got back involved. So, your inability to accept the PvX Nature of Instances and the fact that Instances are PvP Based, Story based, Class Based and Racial Based is a massive issue. The point of the instances are to provide focussed endeavours not to provide Raid Progression in a closed environment.
We'll probably see something like BRD and Molten Core. Got to fight your way through one in order to get to the other which is decent in my books for what it's worth.
Funny thing though, if you really think about what an "open world" dungeon really is... lol
I'm not suggesting it. The devs stated it. The quotes are in the wiki. It makes perfect sense why Steven is adamant we won't need dps meters. If the challenges are not traditional instance challenges like WoW for the most part we don't need WoW tools. After all, I still believe we can contest the legendary world bosses.
I'm talking about what you're suggesting in your post.
Okay cool. I've made so many posts that the statement confuses me lol.
You were just talking about how the instanced content is at the end of the open world dungeon. Similar to how BRD and Molten Core is.
Dungeon/raid entrance within a dungeon/raid.
Yeah perfect. I understand now. The good news is the open world dungeons can be contested so it's not really an instance in an instance. The theory is sound though.
true but if you really think about what an open world dungeon is, it isn't that unique of a feature especially with how seamless transitions work in to it all lol.
We'll probably see something like BRD and Molten Core. Got to fight your way through one in order to get to the other which is decent in my books for what it's worth.
Funny thing though, if you really think about what an "open world" dungeon really is... lol
I'm not suggesting it. The devs stated it. The quotes are in the wiki. It makes perfect sense why Steven is adamant we won't need dps meters. If the challenges are not traditional instance challenges like WoW for the most part we don't need WoW tools. After all, I still believe we can contest the legendary world bosses.
I'm talking about what you're suggesting in your post.
Okay cool. I've made so many posts that the statement confuses me lol.
You were just talking about how the instanced content is at the end of the open world dungeon. Similar to how BRD and Molten Core is.
Dungeon/raid entrance within a dungeon/raid.
Yeah perfect. I understand now. The good news is the open world dungeons can be contested so it's not really an instance in an instance. The theory is sound though.
true but if you really think about what an open world dungeon is, it isn't that unique of a feature especially with how seamless transitions work in to it all lol.
Welcome back. Yeah, I understand the point. You don't have to contest all the time. You can also be social. You could even invite other low level players to join the adventure deeper into the dungeon. Though how many instances will be inside these open world dungeons remains to be seen.
So, your inability to accept the PvX Nature of Instances and the fact that Instances are PvP Based, Story based, Class Based and Racial Based is a massive issue.
The issue is that you think this list is exhaustive.
All of these will exist, as will other uses for the instancing mechanic.
That doesn't mean the game will have a full instanced raid progression - but I have never said that was the case. In other threads I have said I would like to see it be the case, and it could be done while staying true to what Ashes is as a game - but I have never said it will be the case, and have not bought it up at all in this thread.
Pro-tip; content being tiered is not the same thing as a full progression.
So, your inability to accept the PvX Nature of Instances and the fact that Instances are PvP Based, Story based, Class Based and Racial Based is a massive issue.
The issue is that you think this list is exhaustive.
All of these will exist, as will other uses for the instancing mechanic.
I don't think the list is exhaustive at all. I'm trying to establish the facts. I use the terms Steven and the devs use to the best of my knowledge and I only have certain information to hand. Thus, after your input about the single digit feats in 2018 where instances were mixed in, the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids. You might get single digit instances in an expansion, I just don't believe its the case.
the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids.
This is neither a statement that is pertinent to this discussion, nor is it anything you have any reason to claim.
We are not talking about Stevens comment about some content being so hard that a single digit percent of players are able to kill it - that statement just isn't a part of this discussion.
the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids.
This is neither a statement that is pertinent to this discussion, nor is it anything you have any reason to claim.
We are not talking about Stevens comment about some content being so hard that a single digit percent of players are able to kill it - that statement just isn't a part of this discussion.
I have every reason to claim it. I said the point of instances (single digit content) is to show off and cosmetics are good to show off with. You said the point is progression. I then said there won't be tiered progression like WoW, then I said there will be tiered progression in open world and then you said tiered progression is not progression. It is not my fault you keep changing the parameters of the conversation.
the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids.
This is neither a statement that is pertinent to this discussion, nor is it anything you have any reason to claim.
We are not talking about Stevens comment about some content being so hard that a single digit percent of players are able to kill it - that statement just isn't a part of this discussion.
I have every reason to claim it. I said the point of instances (single digit content) is to show off and cosmetics are good to show off with. You said the point is progression. I then said there won't be tiered progression like WoW, then I said there will be tiered progression in open world and then you said tiered progression is not progression. It is not my fault you keep changing the parameters of the conversation.
I'm not changing paramaters.
I said the point of instances (all content) is progression - you said there won't be tiered progression like WoW.
I didn't say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, I said it is progression.
Like many people here, you need to learn to not add words to what people are saying. If I wanted to say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, then those words in that order are what I would have said.
However, the words I used were "The point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress." - and thus those words in that order without any additions from you are what I was meaning to say.
To reiterate, the point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress.
the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids.
This is neither a statement that is pertinent to this discussion, nor is it anything you have any reason to claim.
We are not talking about Stevens comment about some content being so hard that a single digit percent of players are able to kill it - that statement just isn't a part of this discussion.
I have every reason to claim it. I said the point of instances (single digit content) is to show off and cosmetics are good to show off with. You said the point is progression. I then said there won't be tiered progression like WoW, then I said there will be tiered progression in open world and then you said tiered progression is not progression. It is not my fault you keep changing the parameters of the conversation.
I'm not changing paramaters.
I said the point of instances (all content) is progression - you said there won't be tiered progression like WoW.
I didn't say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, I said it is progression.
Like many people here, you need to learn to not add words to what people are saying. If I wanted to say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, then those words in that order are what I would have said.
However, the words I used were "The point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress." - and thus those words in that order without any additions from you are what I was meaning to say.
To reiterate, the point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress.
In an economy with crafted gear it is to show off yeah. The whole reward structure is to show off. There is no progress when you can get the same resources at low level that you can get at high level. The only real progress comes from the professions which isn't tied to adventure level per say. Basic risk/reward is a dopamine fix - vertical progression is a dopamine fix. Horizontal progression is a dopamine fix. You don't do anything for nothing and you also aren't shy about your achievements. Conversely, I then suggested a PvE Season and you said it was like dailies and you wouldn't play a game with a PvE Season, yet, the devs already have PvE achievements and PvP achievements tracked in an opt in manner.
edit: furthermore, I don't add words to what people are saying. I mentioned tiers and the tiered progression, you then said tiered progression is not progression. Otherwise you would have said 'Progression is not Progression' which would make you an utter fool. The last time we debated like this I was on cannabis and away with the fairies but this time round i'm completely clean and fully able minded.
Pro-tip; content being tiered is not the same thing as a full progression.
This is what you said above. Content being tiered is progression. Progression is progression which is all progression can be. How can progression be considered 'full'. The whole point of tiered progression is to strive for the next tier and aim for the peak. Not to progress for progressions sake. Otherwise, you have a hollow victory. That's why content gets churned so fast by PvE Players. The whole point of getting a full set of armour or a cosmetic is to show others you are capable. People often ask where or how you got said armour/cosmetic. Especially when the cosmetic is earnt through rewards and not the cash shop. Its called building a social construct.
content being tiered is not the same thing as a full progression.
What you then said I said
tiered progression is not progression.
Even if you don't understand the meaning, surely you can see that I used different words than you said I used.
Nice retort however, its your issue with comprehension. I refute progression can be 'full' thus, tiered progression is still progression. I could go into vertical progression (levels) and horizontal progression (tiers) but I feel you'd skip over the input like usual and counter with some minimal issues that don't undertake the substance. Has happened in most of the thread. I googled 'full progression in an mmo' and nothing came up. Therefore you're either unique or ill informed in the MMO world.
I googled 'full progression in an mmo' and nothing came up.
Well shit, if only there was some way you could ask me what I meant by it, instead of trying to guess, getting it wrong and then doubling down on your false assumption.
Pro-tip; content being tiered is not the same thing as a full progression.
This is what you said above. Content being tiered is progression. Progression is progression which is all progression can be. How can progression be considered 'full'. The whole point of tiered progression is to strive for the next tier and aim for the peak. Not to progress for progressions sake. Otherwise, you have a hollow victory. That's why content gets churned so fast by PvE Players. The whole point of getting a full set of armour or a cosmetic is to show others you are capable. People often ask where or how you got said armour/cosmetic. Especially when the cosmetic is earnt through rewards and not the cash shop. Its called building a social construct.
Steven said 'The instances are used for Story, Class and Racial Purposes. They are not designed to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.' That was 2 years ago.
Yes, that is the quote I was talking about as well.
They are not to be farmed repeatedly or for grinding.
Not "they are single use only".
These are distinctly different statements. Steven said one, you are essentially claiming he said the other.
Why would you want to repeat a Class, Racial or Story Instance? That's all the PvE instances are for.
Comments
Can totally have systems where BiS comes from both instanced difficult content only the smallest playerbase can complete, and also crafted, and have no vertical progression grind.
To lots of players, 'progression' means clearing one tier over and over to gear up, then the next tier using last tier gear, and repeat forever. (This sucks, its why wow is a bad game, and nostalgia is the only thing keeping players there.)
When we hear words said that "this content only <10% of players can do", progression should mean, a team has managed to complete 30% of the fight, and then some time later, have progressed to complete 35% of the fight, because it is that difficult. We are talking about less than a few hundred people capable of clearing per 10,000 player server.
If there was gear loot at the end, if its BiS gear, then that means its equivalent in power to what the best crafters can make, since the wiki already states the best stuff comes from crafting. Maybe it looks a heck of a lot better or cooler or unique than the crafted stuff. Maybe its easier to enchant, maybe its purely cosmetic even with no stats. Who knows, I dont care actually, I just like challenging raids that take several weeks or even longer to figure out and clear with a very talented team.
I wouldnt worry about power or gear scaling being based on raids since that is against the stated design of this game. Which gives me more time to explore all the parts of the game in between expansions, rather than purely focus on raiding, thats a good thing.
What I do worry about, is when I hear it said over and over that the highest challenge in the game is open world bosses. Because those, in most games, are really, really easy to kill. So what if other players can add lots of mayhem to the encounter, the boss design of open world bosses is usually really not that hard. The difficulty comes completely from the PvX part of the fight. Which is why when the OP says "What role should instanced dungeons play in aoc", I want to reply with "The most challenging PvE"
The bosses are Legendary World Bosses...I don't think you'll be able to defeat these bosses if you think you can cheese them, especially when PvP is happening at the same time. They are Horde Mode, Wave Defence, Legendary Mobs/Legendary Bosses which can annihilate 91 to 99% of the server player base. You can't zerg the legendary world bosses due to the zerg mechanics, you just have to send your elite raid team.
I never said anything about cheesing them, I said in most games, they are just boring. That means they have low effort mechanics to figure out.
Its not the World Bosses you want to worry about. Its The Legendary World Bosses mate.
Except that isn't all they are for.
The notion that instances will only be for that content was from 2017/2018. Intrepid have since said that they now intend to use instances for other things, specifically stating that they have included the notion that instances would be used if the content designer wants to limit the people present for an encounter to a specific number.
This is what I meant earlier by the wiki having information from a range of periods of the games design, and the design intention has changed in that time.
Yes I know. That information is also from 2 years ago. Steven said the instances might be 8 man. Its in the same video Nikr and I linked. Also, it refers to the instances in the sieges - player numbers are limited on both sides for a fairer fight in said content. Also, from march this year there will be specific types of raids in instances but only for some bosses. It was reiterated the game is not for everyone.
edit: Also, tiers will exist for PvE but its based on the open world bosses and encounters, not instances to my knowledge.
The notion that an instance may be limited to 8 players (a single group) isn't new information, that is the actual function of an instance. Saying that is some sort of new information is like saying the game will have PvP, but then following that up with "and you'll be able to attack other players as well" as "new information".
The part that changed isn't that instances will limit the number of players present. The part that changed is that the fact that instances do this has become a reason for a piece of content being instanced, where as before that was not the case. I'm not sure what the point of this comment is.
Yes, PvE in the open world will have tiered content. So what. Also, PvE instances are not currently planned to have tiers. That is what I said - but then I also said that tiered instances will eventually become part of the plan.
You missed some of my quote somehow. You can limit an instance to one person - seen it done many times. I didn't put it as new information, I said it was stated two years ago and meant you said it was new information. The point about tiered content in the open world means there's less point to have closed tier progression in instances. Steven said this year that the game is designed to be open world. Why would they do an expansion that isn't based on the same experience as the backers chose? Half the PvE players don't even want to play due to the sea/ocean change.
The point isn't the number of people it is limited to, the point is the fact that they have said the fact that it limits the number of people is a reason to use it.
You are trying to say instancing will be used for story purposes, Intrtepid have since said they will occasionally use it specifically because it limits the number of people present.
What this means - by actual definition - is that Intrepid will have some instances for the sake of them being instances.
Not many - but some. They won't drop best in slot items, but that isn't the point. The point is, they will exist to be their own content.
If you had have focused on what was being said instead of trying to run off on pointless tangents, you would have come to this understanding several pages back.
Yeah I know that. That's the part of my other post you didn't quote...
Here is the earlier post. The problem remains that I'm using PvP examples and you're using PvE examples but you don't acknowledge my PvP examples yet I'm expected to acknowledge your PvE examples. The instances are for both content areas.
Yes, the problem remains that you are using PvP examples when we are talking about instanced PvE content.
You are correct - that is the problem.
Would you like to fix that problem now?
No. I don't because I'm talking PvX and PvX Content. The 20% of the instances covers both PvP and PvE elements. Its not just a PvE sphere. Steven calls the PvX Players 'The Golden Cohort'.
Again missing the point.
I'm not saying 20% of all content will be instanced PvE content. I've already said that is an incredibly high percent (I honestly don't expect 20% of the game over all to be instanced - that would feel like a mostly instanced game).
What I am saying - what I have been saying this whole discussion with you, what I have been saying since 2018 - is that PvE instancing will exist in Ashes that is seperate from the story based instancing that Intrepid talked about a long time ago.
They will have PvE instances for the sake of that content being instanced.
Not a lot of it - but some of it.
All the other bullshit you have been talking abot (apartments, sieges, PvP, arenas et al) is literally all you missing the point - whether unwittingly or purposefully.
Clearly you haven't read all of my posts because I said bosses will be instanced to Nikr. Between Nikr and I we discussed the story instances then you got back involved. So, your inability to accept the PvX Nature of Instances and the fact that Instances are PvP Based, Story based, Class Based and Racial Based is a massive issue. The point of the instances are to provide focussed endeavours not to provide Raid Progression in a closed environment.
true but if you really think about what an open world dungeon is, it isn't that unique of a feature especially with how seamless transitions work in to it all lol.
Welcome back. Yeah, I understand the point. You don't have to contest all the time. You can also be social. You could even invite other low level players to join the adventure deeper into the dungeon. Though how many instances will be inside these open world dungeons remains to be seen.
The issue is that you think this list is exhaustive.
All of these will exist, as will other uses for the instancing mechanic.
That doesn't mean the game will have a full instanced raid progression - but I have never said that was the case. In other threads I have said I would like to see it be the case, and it could be done while staying true to what Ashes is as a game - but I have never said it will be the case, and have not bought it up at all in this thread.
Pro-tip; content being tiered is not the same thing as a full progression.
I don't think the list is exhaustive at all. I'm trying to establish the facts. I use the terms Steven and the devs use to the best of my knowledge and I only have certain information to hand. Thus, after your input about the single digit feats in 2018 where instances were mixed in, the fact remains the single digit content is open world raids. You might get single digit instances in an expansion, I just don't believe its the case.
We are not talking about Stevens comment about some content being so hard that a single digit percent of players are able to kill it - that statement just isn't a part of this discussion.
I have every reason to claim it. I said the point of instances (single digit content) is to show off and cosmetics are good to show off with. You said the point is progression. I then said there won't be tiered progression like WoW, then I said there will be tiered progression in open world and then you said tiered progression is not progression. It is not my fault you keep changing the parameters of the conversation.
I'm not changing paramaters.
I said the point of instances (all content) is progression - you said there won't be tiered progression like WoW.
I didn't say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, I said it is progression.
Like many people here, you need to learn to not add words to what people are saying. If I wanted to say the point of instances is tiered progression like WoW, then those words in that order are what I would have said.
However, the words I used were "The point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress." - and thus those words in that order without any additions from you are what I was meaning to say.
To reiterate, the point of content and reward (basic risk/reward) isnt to show off. It is to progress.
In an economy with crafted gear it is to show off yeah. The whole reward structure is to show off. There is no progress when you can get the same resources at low level that you can get at high level. The only real progress comes from the professions which isn't tied to adventure level per say. Basic risk/reward is a dopamine fix - vertical progression is a dopamine fix. Horizontal progression is a dopamine fix. You don't do anything for nothing and you also aren't shy about your achievements. Conversely, I then suggested a PvE Season and you said it was like dailies and you wouldn't play a game with a PvE Season, yet, the devs already have PvE achievements and PvP achievements tracked in an opt in manner.
edit: furthermore, I don't add words to what people are saying. I mentioned tiers and the tiered progression, you then said tiered progression is not progression. Otherwise you would have said 'Progression is not Progression' which would make you an utter fool. The last time we debated like this I was on cannabis and away with the fairies but this time round i'm completely clean and fully able minded.
Feel free to find where you think I said it.
This is what you said above. Content being tiered is progression. Progression is progression which is all progression can be. How can progression be considered 'full'. The whole point of tiered progression is to strive for the next tier and aim for the peak. Not to progress for progressions sake. Otherwise, you have a hollow victory. That's why content gets churned so fast by PvE Players. The whole point of getting a full set of armour or a cosmetic is to show others you are capable. People often ask where or how you got said armour/cosmetic. Especially when the cosmetic is earnt through rewards and not the cash shop. Its called building a social construct.
Nice retort however, its your issue with comprehension. I refute progression can be 'full' thus, tiered progression is still progression. I could go into vertical progression (levels) and horizontal progression (tiers) but I feel you'd skip over the input like usual and counter with some minimal issues that don't undertake the substance. Has happened in most of the thread. I googled 'full progression in an mmo' and nothing came up. Therefore you're either unique or ill informed in the MMO world.
Well shit, if only there was some way you could ask me what I meant by it, instead of trying to guess, getting it wrong and then doubling down on your false assumption.
I did ask...
help guild friends/guild members.