Jump to content

Oricon (HM) 8-Man Progression Tracking - Suggestion Thread


Recommended Posts

As many of you know SuckaFish handled the progression tracking threads/spreadsheets for NiM TFB and S&V and we're looking to provide a similar option for the upcoming HM raids on Oricon (Dread Fortress and Dread Palace).

I'm starting this thread to gather any suggestions on how to handle some of the problems faced.

 

Here are some specific points I'm looking for feedback on but feel free to talk about other things.

 

  • Two Operations - How do we want to handle them both being available at once? At least there's no boss skipping this time.
  • Verification - Screenshots going to be required, UTC clock required also or just a penalty for not providing one?
  • Deterioration - How fast do we want the points to deteriorate after the first kill? By time is better than by number of kills but do we want it to be linear or a curve (steep initially and shallow later).
  • Bonuses - For top 3 kills on any boss providing a bonus, do we want this if so how big?
  • Boss Weighting - More emphasis on later bosses or even throughout?

 

 

Here are my answers to the questions for you to agree/disagree with.

 

Two Operations - How do we want to handle them both being available at once?
I think they should both be accessible at the same time and that by weighting the later bosses with more points it encourages a guild to clear one instance before the other.

Verification - Screenshots going to be required, UTC clock required also or just a penalty for not providing one?
I think UTC clock should have to be in the screenshot, it's not that hard, if you forget go and take one of your achievements with it and get that time.

Deterioration - How fast do we want the points to deteriorate after the first kill? By time is better than by number of kills but do we want it to be linear or a curve (steep initially and shallow later).

I think dropping to half value after 1 week is a good rate with a curve causing it to drop to 1/4 value after 2 weeks and so on is a reasonable level.

Bonuses - For top 3 kills on any boss providing a bonus, do we want this if so how big?
I think these are nice but should be kept small so there's not a big impact on the results from them.

Boss Weighting - More emphasis on later bosses or even throughout?
More for the later bosses.

 

 

You can leave feedback here or message me on this site or on enjin. After about a week or two I'll put together a spreadsheet based off the feedback and make a thread for everyone to post their kills in.

Edited by insaneric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is this is HM so why bother? Should we have a progression chart for SM and FP's as well? Right now 8/10 bosses are a joke it might be 9/10 but have not re tried the last one in fortress in the last few weeks.

 

First guilds that zone in will be 8/10 for sure and knowing Bioware the other 2 bosses will get nerfed so i predict many many guilds 10/10 first day so again what's the point of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is this is HM so why bother? Should we have a progression chart for SM and FP's as well? Right now 8/10 bosses are a joke it might be 9/10 but have not re tried the last one in fortress in the last few weeks.

 

First guilds that zone in will be 8/10 for sure and knowing Bioware the other 2 bosses will get nerfed so i predict many many guilds 10/10 first day so again what's the point of this.

 

We are volunteering to do this. You don't have to participate. We are not wasting your time by doing it...we are wasting ours and we don't mind.

 

We did for S&V HM as well and guilds took part.

 

Doing this also allows us to work through any scoring issues and maybe come to some sort of general consensus on how to score in lieu of NiM progression. A lot less at stake in the HM progression. So if we make scoring mistakes it won't be that big of a deal. And that way we won't repeat them for NiM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First guilds that zone in will be 8/10 for sure and knowing Bioware the other 2 bosses will get nerfed so i predict many many guilds 10/10 first day so again what's the point of this.

 

Well, i dont think so. They wont get "nerfed" :rak_03:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion is this is HM so why bother? Should we have a progression chart for SM and FP's as well? Right now 8/10 bosses are a joke it might be 9/10 but have not re tried the last one in fortress in the last few weeks.

 

First guilds that zone in will be 8/10 for sure and knowing Bioware the other 2 bosses will get nerfed so i predict many many guilds 10/10 first day so again what's the point of this.

 

What was the reasoning behind DnT doing PTS? Rhomea says he hates stale content and you guys were on pts a lot. Seems weird not like these HM won't be here for the next 7 months

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heidy, I hope your right and the fights will stay difficult for the last boss in each zone. But how often is that the case =) I guess technically it's not even a nerf would just be tuning before going live lol. I can even hope the other 8 fights get tuned a bit harder before going live but again most likely wishful thinking.

 

JDotter, Hum why did DnT do PST. Well i'm sure it's for a number of reasons.

 

1) We found multiple bugs which we reported and some of them have already been fixed. Nice not to have to deal with them on live.

2) Might as well learn the fights doing pts a few hours here and there so we can continue raiding just a few nights a week even after it launches.

3) It's sometime new to do and new things are fun? Why does anyone ever join a beta for any game out there most of the time the answer is it's fun to try new things first before it goes out to everyone.

4) I don't speak for the guild so I'm sure there are more reasons the above are just mine.

 

Did we spend a lot of time on the PTS? If you go back and look at our steams you might be surprised just how little time we put in. Due to a few people being a bit casual we had very little time with our core group in pts. An example is this week we got a whole 4 hours in. We had a whole 3 hours total with our core on the Council fight the entire pts that does not seem like much to me.

 

Anyways my opinion stands having a progression thread for HM is like having one for SM. So you guys should do that to. See who can be the Worlds best SM guild!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JDotter, Hum why did DnT do PST. Well i'm sure it's for a number of reasons.

 

1) We found multiple bugs which we reported and some of them have already been fixed. Nice not to have to deal with them on live.

2) Might as well learn the fights doing pts a few hours here and there so we can continue raiding just a few nights a week even after it launches.

3) It's sometime new to do and new things are fun? Why does anyone ever join a beta for any game out there most of the time the answer is it's fun to try new things first before it goes out to everyone.

4) I don't speak for the guild so I'm sure there are more reasons the above are just mine.

 

Did we spend a lot of time on the PTS? If you go back and look at our steams you might be surprised just how little time we put in. Due to a few people being a bit casual we had very little time with our core group in pts. An example is this week we got a whole 4 hours in. We had a whole 3 hours total with our core on the Council fight the entire pts that does not seem like much to me.

 

^pretty much this.

Why would we do something like NiM TFB where we've seen and run it in various forms for over a year, when we could be on the PTS running something fresh and new? In addition, it's a good time to learn new fights and to identify and report bugs.

 

Though I'd like to point out that the PTS is not the only thing we did this week. We also went and did NiM S&V because it was fast and then did PTS afterwards. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

JDotter, Hum why did DnT do PST. Well i'm sure it's for a number of reasons.

 

1) We found multiple bugs which we reported and some of them have already been fixed. Nice not to have to deal with them on live.

2) Might as well learn the fights doing pts a few hours here and there so we can continue raiding just a few nights a week even after it launches.

3) It's sometime new to do and new things are fun? Why does anyone ever join a beta for any game out there most of the time the answer is it's fun to try new things first before it goes out to everyone.

4) I don't speak for the guild so I'm sure there are more reasons the above are just mine.

 

Did we spend a lot of time on the PTS? If you go back and look at our steams you might be surprised just how little time we put in. Due to a few people being a bit casual we had very little time with our core group in pts. An example is this week we got a whole 4 hours in. We had a whole 3 hours total with our core on the Council fight the entire pts that does not seem like much to me.

 

Anyways my opinion stands having a progression thread for HM is like having one for SM. So you guys should do that to. See who can be the Worlds best SM guild!!!

 

1) Thats fair & valid

2) You expect 10+ guilds to go 10/10 on day one? Correct me wrong but only guilds I saw that tested were DnT/DILIH/Sucka/SG so clearing day one 10/10 need for second day????

3) I suppose

 

Time is irrelevant, main "core" group is irrelevant its next man up if you can't solidify 8 thats on your raiders.

 

I'm sure we will track SM then again DnT won't be tracking considering just the last tier someone had their goldfish died and you all dropped out.

 

 

Anyhow sorry for being a ******e wasn't intended just don't like when people **** on something someone does for the community when they are looking for suggestions/ways to improve the system

 

 

cheers.

Edited by JDotter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote=SilentFury;6768033

First guilds that zone in will be 8/10 for sure and knowing Bioware the other 2 bosses will get nerfed so i predict many many guilds 10/10 first day so again what's the point of this.

 

First decent pugs will 8/10, all people will basically be tracking here is who got into the instance first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) You expect 10+ guilds to go 10/10 on day one? Correct me wrong but only guilds I saw that tested were DnT/DILIH/Sucka/SG so clearing day one 10/10 need for second day????

 

We acutally tested alot, too. And i think some other guilds on other server. So...

 

First decent pugs will 8/10, all people will basically be tracking here is who got into the instance first.

Thats correct, but i think it will be 10/10 on the first day.

 

Anyhow sorry for being a ******e wasn't intended just don't like when people **** on something someone does for the community when they are looking for suggestions/ways to improve the system

 

cheers.

Ye, thats the point. cheers.

Edited by Heidy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Two Operations - How do we want to handle them both being available at once? At least there's no boss skipping this time.
  • Verification - Screenshots going to be required, UTC clock required also or just a penalty for not providing one?
  • Deterioration - How fast do we want the points to deteriorate after the first kill? By time is better than by number of kills but do we want it to be linear or a curve (steep initially and shallow later).
  • Bonuses - For top 3 kills on any boss providing a bonus, do we want this if so how big?
  • Boss Weighting - More emphasis on later bosses or even throughout?

 

Treating this as if it was Nightmare tracking (so that the same discussion isn't required for that). Personally I don't really think HM is worth the effort of tracking but respect your wish to do so.

 

Two Operations - Count the instances separately that way if someone misses out on Fortress they can pull it back on Palace etc.. keeps the pressure up for those who have done Fortress etc..

 

Verification - If people want to contribute to the thread they should do the screenshots as required. Should be required (if only to make your life easier :p)

 

Deterioration - imo only the last boss in each instance should count with a simple list of top 10 on the other bosses. Title claims should be listed separately.

 

Bonuses - If going with the previous points decay over time for every single boss, don't add bonuses imo the only thing I would probs want added is week bonus if the points system was in place.

 

Boss Weighting - As above imo only the last boss should be counted. By design if the is a 'blocker' boss like DG NiM the guild that kills it first will most likely get to and kill the last boss first too.

 

Stream and Kill video release - Personally I'm happy with releasing vids as soon as the kill happens. However we saw some complaints last time where people were unhappy that certain tactics were leaked via streams / people didn't want to stream or release a vid in case this affected results (with the point decay system) . Might want to consider some 'rules' as to this if we don't want a repeat of the problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ofc this is HM, and i think everyone is aware that this is more a kind of raidrace than a real 'content-progression'. But this is no reason to not track the kills and having fun of this 'fast-food' competition. Besides that, its all about keeping the pve-community alive while waiting for the next nightmare modes.

So thumbs up for the work spend here!

 

But btt, this are just my personal opinions:

Verification - Kill-Screenshots with UTC clock are the best way to verify. But if u just miss the shot, there should be the option to take a screenshot of ur achievments with the UTC clock (perhaps just right after the kills) without any penalty.

Two Operations - If there are no mechanics introduced in which order to clear the operations (i personally think they will be some sort of requirement to enter palace) i propose to count the 2 operations as one content (oricon HM).

Deterioration - This is the most difficult part, especially in regards to the 'two operation' question. I wouldnt spent too much work in that. All what is to be ensured is that the points for two guilds starting at the same time in two different ops and clearing it in the same time shouldnt differ to much (depending on how much guilds are going in this or that ops).

Bonuses - not needed.

Boss Weighting - If u wanna weight, just a bonus on the endboss.

Edited by Leylea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made a Prototype

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au2fnVW6lDXQdFdKY0ZKblNHSy1qREt1VkhWbF9mcXc#gid=14

It currently using some of the times from S&V NiM to show how the points will total.

 

A few features to note:

- Verification required (you'll be listed but receive 0 points without it)

- Bosses grant a max of 500 points, 800 for final bosses as an extra incentive to finish one instance before starting the other.

- No bonuses for 1st, 2nd and 3rd on boss kills

- Either instance can be started first (or at any point), however the bosses in Fortress lose their value faster after the first kill encouraging guilds to clear this instance first.

 

If there's any issues you want to raise or anything feel should be changed, now is the last chance to speak. I'll be making the final version and thread on Friday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Made a Prototype

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au2fnVW6lDXQdFdKY0ZKblNHSy1qREt1VkhWbF9mcXc#gid=14

It currently using some of the times from S&V NiM to show how the points will total.

 

A few features to note:

- Verification required (you'll be listed but receive 0 points without it)

- Bosses grant a max of 500 points, 800 for final bosses as an extra incentive to finish one instance before starting the other.

- No bonuses for 1st, 2nd and 3rd on boss kills

- Either instance can be started first (or at any point), however the bosses in Fortress lose their value faster after the first kill encouraging guilds to clear this instance first.

 

If there's any issues you want to raise or anything feel should be changed, now is the last chance to speak. I'll be making the final version and thread on Friday.

 

I would still say treat them separately with the same rules (no different degredation etc) but your choice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1)

I'm sure we will track SM then again DnT won't be tracking considering just the last tier someone had their goldfish died and you all dropped out.

 

Wait, you think we didn't participate in the SnV progression thread because we didn't raid a full night the first day and dropped out? We said from the get-go we weren't participating in that particular thread, and Ansalem posted at his own behest with the single solitary update.

 

If you're concerned with our ranking however I am sure you can find the original post on http://www.dtguilds.com. Think it fell 3rd or 4th according to the Google doc. Let's not derail this thread though, it's for suggestions for those that want to participate.

 

Thanks for putting this together, maybe we'll participate in NiM mode but no interest in HM. Fingers crossed for an API/armory type system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

- Either instance can be started first (or at any point), however the bosses in Fortress lose their value faster after the first kill encouraging guilds to clear this instance first.

...

 

Can u explain, why u wanna encourage guilds going Fortress first?

I dont see any reason for this point. If u wanna go this way, u could just require clearing Fortress to be tracked for palace. In my opinion this point will lead to too much tactical argy-bargy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can u explain, why u wanna encourage guilds going Fortress first?

I dont see any reason for this point. If u wanna go this way, u could just require clearing Fortress to be tracked for palace. In my opinion this point will lead to too much tactical argy-bargy.

Fortress is the logical first operation in the chain so it's encouraged as first. I'm not wanting to make it exclusive so as to not "stop" progression (for all guilds or weaker guilds) if a boss is unexpectedly difficult or broken.

By "stop" progression i mean forcing them to decide between taking part in the tracking and clearing all the content that they're currently capable of.

 

I don't believe there with be much "tactical argy-bargy" (nice phrase btw) as the clear path to get maximum points is to clear Fortress completely first then Palace. It's only guilds that will not down a boss that may benefit from switching early (and these guilds shouldn't be ranking in top spots overall regardless of their choice).

 

A related issue I'd like to comment on:

At the walls, left and right, in front of the entrance of Dread Palace, there are two Dread Palace access panels with a red light. I think you will have to clear Dread Fortress to gain access to Dread Palace.

It is possible Bioware enforcement of one before the other, this would be nice but I expect completing Fortress in SM would allow access to all settings of Palace (SM+HM) making the solution irrelevant. If it is HM complete for HM unlock then the tracking prototype will still work.

Edited by insaneric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, i get that point. Elaborate a tracking in which most guilds can take part, even they didnt clear everything on the first day (or how long it will take) is a good thing. Im with u here.

 

The Kill Values u get are depend on how much time is spend between ur kill and the first kill and on how much guilds had killed the boss between (including in the killrank). am i right here?

Edited by Leylea
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, i get that point. Elaborate a tracking in which most guilds can take part, even they didnt clear everything on the first day (or how long it will take) is a good thing. Im with u here.

 

The Kill Values u get are depend on how much time is spend between ur kill and the first kill and on how much guilds had killed the boss between (including in the killrank). am i right here?

 

It's only dependent on time between your kill and the first kill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't / haven't participated in any progression in any MMORPG so my question is..

 

What is the downside to simply having an accounting of which guild kills which boss first? With a timestamp you can easily put a checkmark on whoever kills X, Y, Z boss first, second or third. No points, no diminishing returns, etc etc.

 

Fortress            1st              2nd            3rd
boss 1               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
boss 2               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
boss 3               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
boss 4               Guild A       Guild C       Guild B
Full clear            Guild A       Guild C       Guild C

Palace               1st              2nd            3rd
boss 1               Guild A       Guild C       Guild C
boss 2               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
boss 3               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
boss 4               Guild A       Guild B       Guild C
Full clear            Guild A       Guild B       Guild C


Timed Run         1st              2nd            3rd
Fortress             Guild B          Guild C       Guild D
Palace               Guild B        Guild C      Guild D

 

Guild A can end up below B (and maybe even C) if Guilds B and C cleared Fortress and Palace only a few minutes or hours than Guild A. Ofcourse the points can always be "changed" and "adjusted." (But) Don't people really only recognize the first and second (maybe third) screenshots of a full clear (with timestamp as proof) anyways?

 

EDIT:

 

For example https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AtS6aucNXnGndEdERDBtc2hKLWxwV080dWNFamVTUGc#gid=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the downside to simply having an accounting of which guild kills which boss first? With a timestamp you can easily put a checkmark on whoever kills X, Y, Z boss first, second or third. No points, no diminishing returns, etc etc.

There's a rank list for each boss already in the spreadsheet. The points is to create a system where you can compare who's done best across the entire wave of content. And it allows more guilds can participate than a top 3 system and that helps to grow the community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...