Open world raids

There is not much information about this, but it seems that there is no limitation for the amount of raid groups inside open world raids.

Do you think it is plausible that people will just take every guild member that is online and divide them into 40m raid groups to cheese all bosses by the sheer number of people?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

winner909098

Abominatus wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

Abominatus wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

I think that if there is instancing, it cant have drops as good as open world.

Why? Are you suggesting that it’s easier to kill bosses in an instance than in the open world? That’s usually not true, since open world bosses can be zerged and instance bosses cannot be. If you’re relying on the presence of pvp to make the open world bosses hard, then the problem is that the presence of pvp contestation is erratic and if the boss is tuned to be beatable while contested, it will be trivial when it isn’t.

It takes the fun out of an open world game if you can safely get good gear in an instanced scripted event against AI. PvErs would never go out into the world and try and fight for resources for their guild, and if the drops weren't as good as open world drops they would sit on the forums and talk about how the unfair the game is to them. I hope it's so that If you want to PvE in ashes, you better be ready to PvP at any time. Minimal instancing or a system that allows guilds to control the entrance to the instance. PvPers are gonna have to PvE and craft to get the best gear in the game. It's an interconnected system.

Nobody is suggesting that YOU have to
go into instances to get good gear. Get your gear through pvp if that’s the progression you want. But basically you’re saying that other people aren’t entitled to have the content and challenge that they want because it’s not the way you want to play. That’s extraordinarily selfish.

no, its the way the devs want you to play. They want conflict, and if instanced dungeons have the same gear, it wont be logical to go to open world dungeons

Abominatus

You think that people who do pve instances will spend all their time in game in the instance?

I played mmos for years, and I can tell you that I spent only a fraction of my time in the instance raiding. The rest of the time I was out in the world farming or doing faction/daily quests, or even some *gasp* pvp.

If they build the reward system properly, raid bosses won’t actually drop gear, they will drop materials needed to craft gear. Those mats can come from a variety of challenging sources of different types, not just raids, and it’s relatively easy to make it so that those materials must be augmented with open world materials to craft the gear you want using the services of master craftsmen. It is still completely interconnected the way you want it to be, it’s just that those who want their premium mats can get them from the progression path they enjoy and prefer.

wArchAngel

The 2 major flaws of instanced content are no contest and inflation.

1. Literally anyone can enter and exit it, and no matter how hard the content is, it will never be as hard as having to compete for it in an open world, to some it will take more time to kill it, to some less time, but eventually everyone who wants to kill it - will kill it, for free, with no outside interaction.
2. Infaltion of loot - an instanced content produces loot per raid, an open world boss produces loot per kill. One allows monopoly, drama, constant interest and will to have that item. The other makes the item obsinely cheap to buy after a set amount of time since its just gonna overflow the market, dropping the value of the item and eventually not making anyone "uniquely" more powerful than others.

There can be instanced content, it can be as hard as people want it to be, but it cannot drop best in slot gear in a game such as Ashes, it kills the whole concept of player-driven-conflict.
There was a great suggestion to make an instanced version of the open world bosses with addition of extremely hard mechanics, and as a reward give unique titles, cosmetics, and other goodies that do not affect the character powerlevel but provide him with brag-rights and something unique that most of the people wont have. And even make those instances scheduled contests, with the "lowest time to kill" graph for example, that rewards the best raid.
But the people that were loudly advocating for instanced pve didnt want that, they wanted the best loot specifically to be dropped out of instances.

Also it is pretty fair to compair ashes to L2, or to Archeage, since those are the games that Steven took inspiration and foundation from, those were his "golden mmorpg times", thats what he loved and thats how he sees and wants to make Ashes.

Abominatus

Bricktop wrote: »

Abominatus wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

Abominatus wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

I think that if there is instancing, it cant have drops as good as open world.

Why? Are you suggesting that it’s easier to kill bosses in an instance than in the open world? That’s usually not true, since open world bosses can be zerged and instance bosses cannot be. If you’re relying on the presence of pvp to make the open world bosses hard, then the problem is that the presence of pvp contestation is erratic and if the boss is tuned to be beatable while contested, it will be trivial when it isn’t.

It takes the fun out of an open world game if you can safely get good gear in an instanced scripted event against AI. PvErs would never go out into the world and try and fight for resources for their guild, and if the drops weren't as good as open world drops they would sit on the forums and talk about how the unfair the game is to them. I hope it's so that If you want to PvE in ashes, you better be ready to PvP at any time. Minimal instancing or a system that allows guilds to control the entrance to the instance. PvPers are gonna have to PvE and craft to get the best gear in the game. It's an interconnected system.

Nobody is suggesting that YOU have to
go into instances to get good gear. Get your gear through pvp if that’s the progression you want. But basically you’re saying that other people aren’t entitled to have the content and challenge that they want because it’s not the way you want to play. That’s extraordinarily selfish.

I don't believe people should be able to skip out on the dangers of getting ganked and all the politics and player driven interactions in an open world game that comes with fighting over limited resources like raid bosses. I think it's selfish of them to want to do that while all the big boy groups are slugging it out in open world.

Ah, now we actually get to it. Your underlying assumption here is that PvE content is less challenging than PvP content and therefore those do do it are less deserving of progression. Aside from being arrogant and condescending, statistics of equivalent accomplishments from games that support both kinds of play show that assertion to be untrue.

winner909098

Abominatus wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

Abominatus wrote: »

Bricktop wrote: »

Abominatus wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

I think that if there is instancing, it cant have drops as good as open world.

Why? Are you suggesting that it’s easier to kill bosses in an instance than in the open world? That’s usually not true, since open world bosses can be zerged and instance bosses cannot be. If you’re relying on the presence of pvp to make the open world bosses hard, then the problem is that the presence of pvp contestation is erratic and if the boss is tuned to be beatable while contested, it will be trivial when it isn’t.

It takes the fun out of an open world game if you can safely get good gear in an instanced scripted event against AI. PvErs would never go out into the world and try and fight for resources for their guild, and if the drops weren't as good as open world drops they would sit on the forums and talk about how the unfair the game is to them. I hope it's so that If you want to PvE in ashes, you better be ready to PvP at any time. Minimal instancing or a system that allows guilds to control the entrance to the instance. PvPers are gonna have to PvE and craft to get the best gear in the game. It's an interconnected system.

Nobody is suggesting that YOU have to
go into instances to get good gear. Get your gear through pvp if that’s the progression you want. But basically you’re saying that other people aren’t entitled to have the content and challenge that they want because it’s not the way you want to play. That’s extraordinarily selfish.

I don't believe people should be able to skip out on the dangers of getting ganked and all the politics and player driven interactions in an open world game that comes with fighting over limited resources like raid bosses. I think it's selfish of them to want to do that while all the big boy groups are slugging it out in open world.

Ah, now we actually get to it. Your underlying assumption here is that PvE content is less challenging than PvP content and therefore those do do it are less deserving of progression. Aside from being arrogant and condescending, statistics of equivalent accomplishments from games that support both kinds of play show that assertion to be untrue.

that is partially because in PVP you might lose stuff while PVE monsters arent going to loot you

Abominatus

wArchAngel wrote: »

The 2 major flaws of instanced content are no contest and inflation.

1. Literally anyone can enter and exit it, and no matter how hard the content is, it will never be as hard as having to compete for it in an open world, to some it will take more time to kill it, to some less time, but eventually everyone who wants to kill it - will kill it, for free, with no outside interaction.
2. Infaltion of loot - an instanced content produces loot per raid, an open world boss produces loot per kill. One allows monopoly, drama, constant interest and will to have that item. The other makes the item obsinely cheap to buy after a set amount of time since its just gonna overflow the market, dropping the value of the item and eventually not making anyone "uniquely" more powerful than others.

There can be instanced content, it can be as hard as people want it to be, but it cannot drop best in slot gear in a game such as Ashes, it kills the whole concept of player-driven-conflict.
There was a great suggestion to make an instanced version of the open world bosses with addition of extremely hard mechanics, and as a reward give unique titles, cosmetics, and other goodies that do not affect the character powerlevel but provide him with brag-rights and something unique that most of the people wont have. And even make those instances scheduled contests, with the "lowest time to kill" graph for example, that rewards the best raid.
But the people that were loudly advocating for instanced pve didnt want that, they wanted the best loot specifically to be dropped out of instances.

Also it is pretty fair to compair ashes to L2, or to Archeage, since those are the games that Steven took inspiration and foundation from, those were his "golden mmorpg times", thats what he loved and thats how he sees and wants to make Ashes.

I would strongly challenge the assertion that “anyone who wants to kill it will kill it”. Taking WoW as an example of instanced content, only a small fraction of guilds killed the Lich King during WotLK despite it being “uncontested”. An almost vanishingly small percentage of players managed to kill yoga Saron with 0 keepers up.

Likewise, in the same game, the number of people who achieved 2500 ranking in arena was only a tiny fraction of the player base.

Unfortunately this is exactly the kind of pvp/pve arrogance that I see all over the place. People who play one way and assume that people who play the other way are somehow inferior or playing easy-mode or whatever.

As to Steven’s intent, I think his overriding intent is to create a game that will be enjoyed by as many people as possible for as long as possible.

Grievousness

winner909098 wrote: »

no, as open world inspires PVP more often, it will require higher skills and more contest than instancing. The game revolves on the open world, so instancing shouldn't give drops that are as good as open world

It requires more PvP than instanced content yea, but that's not exactly compareable.
PvP definitely adds another dimension to world bosses but that does not make them nesseccarily harder.

That's just a guess but I also don't really know if every world boss will be even seriously contestet to begin with.
As far as I am aware they want distance to matter so chances are guilds will stick to certain areas.
Making it more likely that there is one big guild around which will just kill the world bosses without too much other people barging in.
I mean there is no real reason to join a small guild which may be able to contest bosses at some point if there is another guild that already can.

wArchAngel

Abominatus wrote: »

wArchAngel wrote: »

The 2 major flaws of instanced content are no contest and inflation.

1. Literally anyone can enter and exit it, and no matter how hard the content is, it will never be as hard as having to compete for it in an open world, to some it will take more time to kill it, to some less time, but eventually everyone who wants to kill it - will kill it, for free, with no outside interaction.
2. Infaltion of loot - an instanced content produces loot per raid, an open world boss produces loot per kill. One allows monopoly, drama, constant interest and will to have that item. The other makes the item obsinely cheap to buy after a set amount of time since its just gonna overflow the market, dropping the value of the item and eventually not making anyone "uniquely" more powerful than others.

There can be instanced content, it can be as hard as people want it to be, but it cannot drop best in slot gear in a game such as Ashes, it kills the whole concept of player-driven-conflict.
There was a great suggestion to make an instanced version of the open world bosses with addition of extremely hard mechanics, and as a reward give unique titles, cosmetics, and other goodies that do not affect the character powerlevel but provide him with brag-rights and something unique that most of the people wont have. And even make those instances scheduled contests, with the "lowest time to kill" graph for example, that rewards the best raid.
But the people that were loudly advocating for instanced pve didnt want that, they wanted the best loot specifically to be dropped out of instances.

Also it is pretty fair to compair ashes to L2, or to Archeage, since those are the games that Steven took inspiration and foundation from, those were his "golden mmorpg times", thats what he loved and thats how he sees and wants to make Ashes.

I would strongly challenge the assertion that “anyone who wants to kill it will kill it”. Taking WoW as an example of instanced content, only a small fraction of guilds killed the Lich King during WotLK despite it being “uncontested”. An almost vanishingly small percentage of players managed to kill yoga Saron with 0 keepers up.

Likewise, in the same game, the number of people who achieved 2500 ranking in arena was only a tiny fraction of the player base.

Unfortunately this is exactly the kind of pvp/pve arrogance that I see all over the place. People who play one way and assume that people who play the other way are somehow inferior or playing easy-mode or whatever.

As to Steven’s intent, I think his overriding intent is to create a game that will be enjoyed by as many people as possible for as long as possible.

I didnt say it "cant be hard", i said that the content will be harder in a contest situation no matter what, if everyone can enter and challenge a boss, that already in it self equalizes players when it shouldnt, not in what Ashes is trying to be. I am carebearing my self for the past few years, so i was on both ends of the spectrum, but the only reason i was carebearing for that given time is because no game was actually offering me what i was looking for. Right now that game is Ashes, it takes everything i loved back in the days in MMO's and tries to make it right.

Bricktop

I'm not gonna argue with people who are here just to argue. Player driven content is what will make the game exciting and create a "Shifting of the sands" effect that MMOs like Eve and L2 have/had. There are tons of MMOs for people to play that offer instanced PvE content. Games like EVE and Lineage 2 create stories where it offers players resources to fight over and a reason to fight for them. I didn't play much EVE but I heard plenty of stories over the years of massive alliances rising and falling, backstabs and betrayals, corps getting scammed and falling apart, a spy misdirecting an enemy fleet to get a hundred ships killed. All of this is possible because that game offers players a way to drive content and a story and gives them a reason to do it.

In my Lineage 2 server in the very early days a massive alliance took control of the entrance to the dungeon that had a world boss at the end and just a generally important area and sat outside for weeks day and night charging people money to go inside. Eventually the server got sick of it and alliances were formed and war declarations were sent. Guilds fell apart and new ones rose from the dust.

If you start putting things behind instances this takes away from what the game has to offer. The vision of the devs (To my understanding) is an Open world player driven game. Putting gear behind instances takes away from that, it takes away from 2 guilds who have never seen each other before coming to an area to try and kill a boss, seeing each other, and saying "Oh wow what do we do here". Do you PM the leader and try and cut a deal to split the loot? Do you flag up first and start killing people to try and get a big chunk of them dead before they can react quick enough?

I don't believe it's wise to start taking ways for these interactions to happen out of the game.

Abominatus

Grievousness wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

no, as open world inspires PVP more often, it will require higher skills and more contest than instancing. The game revolves on the open world, so instancing shouldn't give drops that are as good as open world

It requires more PvP than instanced content yea, but that's not exactly compareable.
PvP definitely adds another dimension to world bosses but that does not make them nesseccarily harder.

That's just a guess but I also don't really know if every world boss will be even seriously contestet to begin with.
As far as I am aware they want distance to matter so chances are guilds will stick to certain areas.
Making it more likely that there is one big guild around which will just kill the world bosses without too much other people barging in.
I mean there is no real reason to join a small guild which may be able to contest bosses at some point if there is another guild that already can.

This is another problem I’m concerned with at the moment. At the moment, I see an enormous amount of pressure on guilds to be as large as possible. What good is a guild with 50 people in it when the guild that does the most damage to a world boss gets the loot and there are other guilds with 400 people in them? There are similar pressures being exerted through the mechanisms I’ve seen in pvp content.

I have nothing against huge guilds. But often you can have a better experience of community in a smaller guild where you know the other members better. I wouldn’t want it to be impractical for smaller guilds to flourish in the game.

wArchAngel

Abominatus wrote: »

Grievousness wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

no, as open world inspires PVP more often, it will require higher skills and more contest than instancing. The game revolves on the open world, so instancing shouldn't give drops that are as good as open world

It requires more PvP than instanced content yea, but that's not exactly compareable.
PvP definitely adds another dimension to world bosses but that does not make them nesseccarily harder.

That's just a guess but I also don't really know if every world boss will be even seriously contestet to begin with.
As far as I am aware they want distance to matter so chances are guilds will stick to certain areas.
Making it more likely that there is one big guild around which will just kill the world bosses without too much other people barging in.
I mean there is no real reason to join a small guild which may be able to contest bosses at some point if there is another guild that already can.

This is another problem I’m concerned with at the moment. At the moment, I see an enormous amount of pressure on guilds to be as large as possible. What good is a guild with 50 people in it when the guild that does the most damage to a world boss gets the loot and there are other guilds with 400 people in them? There are similar pressures being exerted through the mechanisms I’ve seen in pvp content.

I have nothing against huge guilds. But often you can have a better experience of community in a smaller guild where you know the other members better. I wouldn’t want it to be impractical for smaller guilds to flourish in the game.

The loot is not divided by "guilds dps", its divided by "raid dps", which consists out of 5 groups of 8 people each, if the huge guild brings 400 people, but your squad simply does more damage than any of their separate squads, you will loot it. Thats where the 400 come in handy, as they will most likely simply will wipe the 40 to prevent that contest.
"Small guilds" have the rights to live, but those "small guilds" shouldnt have the rights to contest the highest level of open world content... I am not talking about 40 man guilds, as those are somewhat fine, i am talking about 10-20 man guilds trend that rose in the past years to an absurd amount.
Also one more thing that came to mind that you can add to the "Inflation" part of the instanced content, that every group that can clear that content will create as many alts as possible to re-clear it as many times as possible, multiplying the loot and inflating the economy even more.

Bricktop

Abominatus wrote: »

Grievousness wrote: »

winner909098 wrote: »

no, as open world inspires PVP more often, it will require higher skills and more contest than instancing. The game revolves on the open world, so instancing shouldn't give drops that are as good as open world

It requires more PvP than instanced content yea, but that's not exactly compareable.
PvP definitely adds another dimension to world bosses but that does not make them nesseccarily harder.

That's just a guess but I also don't really know if every world boss will be even seriously contestet to begin with.
As far as I am aware they want distance to matter so chances are guilds will stick to certain areas.
Making it more likely that there is one big guild around which will just kill the world bosses without too much other people barging in.
I mean there is no real reason to join a small guild which may be able to contest bosses at some point if there is another guild that already can.

This is another problem I’m concerned with at the moment. At the moment, I see an enormous amount of pressure on guilds to be as large as possible. What good is a guild with 50 people in it when the guild that does the most damage to a world boss gets the loot and there are other guilds with 400 people in them? There are similar pressures being exerted through the mechanisms I’ve seen in pvp content.

I have nothing against huge guilds. But often you can have a better experience of community in a smaller guild where you know the other members better. I wouldn’t want it to be impractical for smaller guilds to flourish in the game.

There is the guild buff system in place right now to help smaller guilds. Large guilds will have to spend their guild upgrade points on bigger rosters while small guilds can spend them on buffs and such.

Additionally, it's looking very promising that a smaller group who runs very synergized builds will be able to AoE/CC down large less organized groups.

Grievousness

Bricktop wrote: »

I don't believe people should be able to skip out on the dangers of getting ganked and all the politics and player driven interactions in an open world game that comes with fighting over limited resources like raid bosses.

How are you skipping them out?
If you get ganked on the way home from the raid you can still loose items.
Why would people not camp at the entrance of the instance if they want to grief someone?
Happens in WoW all the time as well and you cannot even loot hunting certificates from players there.

Bricktop wrote: »

I think it's selfish of them to want to do that while all the big boy groups are slugging it out in open world.

Everyone would have the option to do it so it cannot be one sided or "selfish" by default.
At least if it is not so hard that "PvP-guys" aren't able to do it.
But if that is the case we already would have a justification why there should be good loot since it has a skill requirement.

I think it is kind of disingenuous to advocate that everything should be a PvP thing and they should also get the best loot in the game for free, how is that not purely selfish?

Also if you get the best loot in the game from world bosses without the guarantee that it is contested 24/7 how can you ensure that nobody just farms it while most people don't play?
How is that a good system to begin with?
Put some mounts or other stuff into the lootpool but a worldboss dropping good items is always a joke.

Abominatus

I think I’ve also said what I have to say, and I doubt I’m going to convince the group advocating against instances, they are simply too convinced that the moment you add instances everyone will run into them and stay there to the exclusion of participating in the rest of the game. As to the concept that instances flood the market with gear, this is actually the opposite of the truth. Instances regulate how often the bosses can be killed by a group. In most cases, once per week. To make a world boss accessible you have to keep respawning it all the time otherwise it just gets zerged when the servers come up from maintenance and anyone who couldn’t be there at that time is just out of luck.

I would urge anyone who is considering this issue to take a look at the excellent video Lazy Peon made about New World and pay attention to what he has to say about endgame progression in that uninstanced environment and how damaging it is to the motivation players have to be involved long-term in that world.

Nobody wants to turn this into WoW, nobody wants to make the open world less compelling. Having instanced raid content in addition to some world bosses won’t do that, no matter what the doomsayers suggest in their drive to force everyone to play exactly the way they do.

Bricktop

You COULD have a situation where guilds farmed world bosses and nobody can contest them until people start making alliances, and that's the cool thing about a player driven game. However, something simple such as a timer after a boss dies, and once that time is up the boss can RANDOMLY spawn anytime in the next 3 days or something could easily help prevent that from being so farmable.

My understanding is that the only thing you will drop in PvP unless you are corrupt is gathering materials. I don't think world boss materials would count as "Gathering Materials" since I envision wood and herbs and things like that, but I suppose they could. Everything is a PvP thing because it's a PvP-centric player-driven game that requires guilds to fight over things like this. Adding instanced raids kills the premise of the game. Everything isn't easy mode for PvP players. PvPers will need to be able to kill bosses and PvE in order to get good gear so they can PvP better. PvErs will need to be able to PvP in order to get good gear so they can PvE better. I'm failing to see the problem.

wArchAngel

Abominatus wrote: »

I think I’ve also said what I have to say, and I doubt I’m going to convince the group advocating against instances, they are simply too convinced that the moment you add instances everyone will run into them and stay there to the exclusion of participating in the rest of the game. As to the concept that instances flood the market with gear, this is actually the opposite of the truth. Instances regulate how often the bosses can be killed by a group. In most cases, once per week. To make a world boss accessible you have to keep respawning it all the time otherwise it just gets zerged when the servers come up from maintenance and anyone who couldn’t be there at that time is just out of luck.

I would urge anyone who is considering this issue to take a look at the excellent video Lazy Peon made about New World and pay attention to what he has to say about endgame progression in that uninstanced environment and how damaging it is to the motivation players have to be involved long-term in that world.

Nobody wants to turn this into WoW, nobody wants to make the open world less compelling. Having instanced raid content in addition to some world bosses won’t do that, no matter what the doomsayers suggest in their drive to force everyone to play exactly the way they do.

What on earth were you playing where maintenances would skew the respawn timers of bosses? Also having instanced content does not regulate the market in any way, since its accessible as many times as it is possible to clear it in a set amount of times, while a world boss is accessible once during his life time until next respawn.
If i can clear an instance with the best loot, i will just make more characters with the same prof, pass my gear from character A to B and clear that instance 8 times in a week instead of 1 possible for a world boss, and that will multiply per group. Tell me again how that will not inflate exactly?
The whole story of "200 hours to lvl up to max" is barelly applied after the first character has been leveled, geared and established, and more in-game experience was made by the player, the next character leveling can take as much as a quarter of the initial time, i will have my alts ready in less than 2 weeks while clearing more and more with every alt that is ready.

Bricktop

Abominatus wrote: »

I would urge anyone who is considering this issue to take a look at the excellent video Lazy Peon made about New World and pay attention to what he has to say about endgame progression in that uninstanced environment and how damaging it is to the motivation players have to be involved long-term in that world.

It's funny you bring New World up. I'm not 100% sure how the story goes but to my understanding that game started as an open world survivalish PvP game that focused on constant sieges and towns trading hands, and full loot PvP. PvErs complained after the first test and they changed the creative director, completely butchered the mechanics of the game and you have the steamer you saw in Beta of where there's now NOTHING to do. Nothing open world nor instanced. I REALLY hope AoC does not take that same route.

Noaani

Bricktop wrote: »

You COULD have a situation where guilds farmed world bosses and nobody can contest them until people start making alliances, and that's the cool thing about a player driven game. However, something simple such as a timer after a boss dies, and once that time is up the boss can RANDOMLY spawn anytime in the next 3 days or something could easily help prevent that from being so farmable.

This is what EQ2 did.

It doesn't change things.

At times I was running the guild that was always missing out on these kills, and at times I was running the guild that was always getting them.

All this kind of spawner does is see guilds set up call lists and spotters, so that when the mob spawned, the guild was called up and those able to make it would log in and take it out. THen they changed it so the encounters only spawned in the "prime time" window for each server, which meant we weren't being called up at 3am on a tuesday to kill an encounter - but still left the kills in the hands of the same guilds.

Again, this is a great way to have some raid content - early morning calls and all. It is not a great way to have all raid content.

Fortunately, EQ2 also had regular instanced raid content so that the guild was able to still remain together during the times we weren't getting the kills.

Bricktop

Noaani wrote: »

Snip

That's the nature of an open world game, sometimes a better guild can get it. Needing scouts to scout for bosses that are up sounds like an interesting aspect to me. Fortunately, AoC is planned to have 20% instanced content that you can do if you aren't killing open world bosses.

Grievousness

There is going to be a lot of PvE content for all portions of the playerbase...

source: https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Ashes_of_Creation#PvE

The premise that some instanced content takes away from the open world is just absurd.
What's next?
Shouldn't we be able to craft items in cities because I cannot get ganked doing it there?
An obligatory duel with your workbench before you can use it, to make crafting qualify as PvP content?

I don't see why there is a need to degrade the meaning and value of any challenging PvE content down to the level of a gimmick just because it is instanced.
I literally cannot imagine how that would work.
Even Archeage had them, they weren't good but it didn't felt like it impacted world pvp or world bosses in any negative way.
How exactly should instanced raiding break the game?????

Child Item