Pug scenario IS LIVE! [Thanks for voting!]

[adei]

This is a slippery slope.

Sad day for gaming.

This is the opposite direction this game should be going.

You are 100% right, let us punish those players who cannot nor do not want to form a group, god forbid we should allow people on a PRIVATE SERVER the chance to have a bit of fun with the leisure time that they have, I mean yeah you are right, lets not cater to the majority of players that play here, let us in fact cater to the minority, I'm sure this game will survive with a few amount premade groups, vs the hundreds and hundreds of pug players.

Sad day for this server indeed when we have players so blind to what keeps the server alive.

[Jaycub]

During NA times there is maybe 30-40 people tops in the scenario pool, and actually I think half of that is guild groups. Maybe not specifically "6 man" guilds but between us, trainwreck, footpatrols greenskin premades, shadows, and really late some guilds like hammerkult.

Piting these groups against each other 6v6 wouldn't be fair most of the time (balance in 12v12 is way different), and I'm afraid what the PUG scenario will do in terms of pops for groups in the mostly dead NA scene atm. We all assumed if we didnt get any pops, and RvR is dead (which it is in NA) we would just form duos and que up for khaines to get any kind of action at all... the alternative being logging off?

Though it would seem you would see us as exploiters in this situation or am I wrong?

I'm just worried that if we are faced with 20+ minute que times, and dead RvR that our guild will probably die, and those of us able to play EU times will just have to absorb into those guilds and play then.

All of this is hypothetical for now, but it's just something I see could certainly happen.

Spoiler:

Being in a NA guild but also playing during some EU I am getting a lot of PUG scenarios as I don't really have a spot in any groups as a DPS, so I am grateful for you pushing this. I'm not against it in any way.

[peterthepan3]

This is a slippery slope.

Sad day for gaming.

This is the opposite direction this game should be going.

You are 100% right, let us punish those players who cannot nor do not want to form a group, god forbid we should allow people on a PRIVATE SERVER the chance to have a bit of fun with the leisure time that they have, I mean yeah you are right, lets not cater to the majority of players that play here, let us in fact cater to the minority, I'm sure this game will survive with a few amount premade groups, vs the hundreds and hundreds of pug players.

Sad day for this server indeed when we have players so blind to what keeps the server alive.

Thing is its not about a minority vs majority thing: it's about sticking to the core of the game, which is organised PvP. As Aza has stated many times, the game doesn't revolve around solo play in any of its guises: if you wish to take a keep, you need to be in an organised warband; if you wish to win scenarios, you need to be in an organised group; want to take over a city? Need organised warbands; want to get lost vale gear? need an organised group.

In any PvP game, in order to succeed at the highest level there is a prerequisite of having at least some organisation.

I am with you in that a pug scen was needed, but if it's done with the intent to appease a group of players who want to play solo as opposed to being in the interests of bettering the PvP/gameplay then I'm not so sure. We shall have to wait and see. It's only one scenario, so I may be exaggerating a bit - but it's good to have this discussion anyway.

I'm not going to throw my lot in with the doomsayers just yet, and if a lot of people are having fun - then fine! Some of my friends are having fun with the pug scenario, and it does allow you to play as classes such as engis/magi and achieve some moderate success.

I don't want to give off the wrong impression! But I will say that if it does have an adverse effect on people queuing as a group (pertinent, in particular, to the issues brought up by Jacob and other players in the NA bracket), then perhaps discussion ought to be had as regardless of population (majority vs minority) people should not be penalised for being with others in a group just to appease those who queue solo; that goes against the very core of a massive multiplayer online game.

Anyway I have to give you kudos on using your initiative to get this implemented, so gj.

[Akalukz]

Spoiler:

I for one will still queue all. But will only get stomped 500-8 with 20 renown points but a few times tops before i switch to the pug on scenario. Some of this goes back to the premades, when they recognize the fact that they are playing against less skilled opponents... why prolong it? This is the frustrating part as a solo/duo type of player... to see these 6 man groups "farming" others. This is what has led us to a solo queue. Blame it on the pugs if you want, but the fault lies at the farmers/greifers who won't run a part or cap or whatever, first it led to the objective based scenarios being "fixed" yet they still farm. They know who they are.

EDIT:

Sorry off topic.

[footpatrol2]

Adel do you play this game in NA time? I'm curious. Are you going to feel this pain?

[adei]

Adel do you play this game in NA time? I'm curious. Are you going to feel this pain?

Save me the NA will suffer argument, its weak. I am sorry but it's about time that this argument about NA not being able to take any change needs to stop, does it suck NA has low population? Absolutely. Should development stop/change because of this? No. If we have 1000+ players online for EU on a regular basis, vs having 100+ online for NA, then we should cater to the larger playerbase, its as simple as that, maybe others will not come out and say it but its the truth.

Should people group up? Yes. Should they be forced to? No. Simple as that, currently you were forced to group ( majority of the time ) in order to have a fair/decent experience in scenarios, I see no reason why puggers should not have at least one scenario - which by the way 6 mans have had for a while now and they had to do none of this, it was simply implemented, where as puggers have had to wait this long.

But yes, sorry to put it so blunty but if this server is to survive and progress in development, then the whole NA will suffer needs to stop. The scenario is in, and so far I have heard nothing but good things from other players, so I think that speaks for itself.

[7rere7]

So what about NA time population , why would premades Que for SC's against pugs anyways ? Its not a challenge or competitive . Why premades enjoy playing that style of play is bewildering !

RVR is where the game was designed to be at for organized group play ! IF groups cant hack it in RVR ,its not a rightful reason to beat up on pugs in SC!

Pugs no longer need an excuse for wanting pug only SC's.The RoR staff have the moral sense of knowing there doing the right thing here!

Now watch there be population increase!!!!

[dur3al]

You are all very dense.

Just think of it in a rational way, and try to fill these shoes:
1) Beginner player in WAR;
2) Non-beginner who enjoy solo play;
3) Non-beginner who enjoy group play with odd setups or incomplete ones;
4) Non-beginner who enjoy group play fotm;

Also consider the natural progression for most players between 1 -> 2 -> 3 -> 4, given that some people will abstain from going from point 2 to 3, and from 3 to 4.

But the natural progression of most players ends at 4. Why? Because is when you utilize the most of the classes synergy between the fotm setups you will have bigger advantage and will win more.

Think of it like gear progression... you would still use T2 gear when there is T4 available? Of course it also involves play-style and preferably spec choice, which will influence on how the player wants to play the game, but this is his personal choice, not how the game was intended to be played.

There will be a time when we will be able to balance classes, skills, specs etc, and make current sub-pair classes more available, and we will also make current must-classes not be so must anymore, and everyone will be able to play whatever spec and still be useful and "good", and the only way for them to progress further will be into building groups to use synergy from other classes. Which is why normal progression to point 4 is inevitable. Sure even then some people will still and want to only play solo, and that is fine... but its like playing counter-strike with pistols only - it is really up to you and you can do it if you want.

Regarding the current topic discussion, it all boils down to population and a smart queue. If we had high population spread around all time-zones and a system that could match "good premades" vs "good premades"; "regular decent premades" vs "regular decent premades"; "random groups" vs random groups"; all down until pugs vs pugs, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Having all that in mind is why I voted yes, with some regards due the population.. even though i'd qualify in the 4'th option I described above.
I also considered that currently the majority of this game's population is what you would call "casuals", and hence would be nice to have a pug only scenario. But got to be careful with additional steps and how population and q-pops will react to that, but we can't see that if we don't test it right?

[footpatrol2]

Ya and this change has the potential to turn this game into all the parts that players dislike about WoW. Its the first step. I don't play that game anymore because of the direction it took. You'll gain more popularity and will likely flourish because your catering to the lowest common denominator like WoW does. Is the goal of this game to be a popularity contest? Or is the goal of this game to make a great game with high quality gameplay? RoR is not fueled by monetary interests. You would think high quality gameplay would be the priority. This act is a step away from high quality gameplay and promotes players to not interact with each other, in a game that is heavily based on group mechanics working together.

Wow is a great business model if all you want is subscribers/popularity and don't care about the quality of game-play happening in most situations. This move is a change of focus on the game and acts against its game mechanics. There will be requests in the future to change game mechanics to fit this style of play. Is this really the direction that RoR wants to go?

I think if you removed the solo que option you'll lose some players but most will choose to adapt. The game will gain a higher quality of play which can blossom into a amazing experience for all who stuck it out. Once a new perception is formed solo que won't even be talked about as a thing and will be praised that RoR got rid of it.

These super die hard solo quers follow the path of least resistance. They will only due what they have too. A lot of the problems this game ran into were from players that held this mentality. Why are we catering to them.

Slippery slope.

Spoiler:

By the way I don't think the 6v6 SC's for premades were that good of a idea. It shapes a perception that this game is solely based on 6 man competitive play. I think if you made a separate bracket for premade 12v12 it would have been better and inline with what this game has been doing throughout its history.

[Thelen]

Ya and this change has the potential to turn this game into all the parts that players dislike about WoW. Its the first step. I don't play that game anymore because of the direction it took. You'll gain more popularity and will likely flourish because your catering to the lowest common denominator like WoW does. Is the goal of this game to be a popularity contest? Or is the goal of this game to make a great game with high quality gameplay? RoR is not fueled by monetary interests. You would think high quality gameplay would be the priority. This act is a step away from high quality gameplay and promotes players to not interact with each other, in a game that is heavily based on group mechanics working together.

Wow is a great business model if all you want is subscribers/popularity and don't care about the quality of game-play happening in most situations. This move is a change of focus on the game and acts against its game mechanics. There will be requests in the future to change game mechanics to fit this style of play. Is this really the direction that RoR wants to go?

I think if you removed the solo que option you'll lose some players but most will choose to adapt. The game will gain a higher quality of play which can blossom into a amazing experience for all who stuck it out. Once a new perception is formed solo que won't even be talked about as a thing and will be praised that RoR got rid of it.

These super die hard solo quers follow the path of least resistance. They will only due what they have too. A lot of the problems this game ran into were from players that held this mentality. Why are we catering to them.

Slippery slope.

Spoiler:

By the way I don't think the 6v6 SC's for premades were that good of a idea. It shapes a perception that this game is solely based on 6 man competitive play. I think if you made a separate bracket for premade 12v12 it would have been better and inline with what this game has been doing throughout its history.

I'm sure all 17 of those people will be very happen when neither side can field more than a WB because you got rid of all the damn casuals ruining your fun.