Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Zorndorf

The future of group play - both in PVE and PvP - is clearly with the clustered server solution. Single server solutions for extensive group play - both in PVE and PVE - are simply not working, due to balance problems in populations AND too small number of players in spread out zones. So goup base activity on one realm servers should be limited both in zones and (max) levels.

The solution is server clusters (like the Bg's in WOW and its upcoming dungeon servers or the clever clustered servers use in EVE).

Then come back and discuss.

Those two examples you are using are too different extremes that work well for their games but would not work at all if you switched them around.

 

WoWs cross-realm instances work great for that game but would have killed WAR off even sooner than MJ did. Even with all the issues WAR had, the sense of community at launch was huge compared to WoW years after launch. Battling the same guilds and alliances week after week, IMO, is 100 times more fun than fighting 50 random guys from 20 different servers. The same goes for EVE, people poor their heart and soul into alliance and territory disputes but if they were just queing up for some 20 minute PvP instance it wouldnt be the same.

 

Now if they all went the single server option, that would be awesome, but some games cant handle the server loads they have now. Dalaran lags with a couple of hundred people in it, I cant imagine how bad it would be with millions.

Well you have a choice: dreaming up to have PvP on a single server and ... have NO game anymore after 6 months time ... because of populations ... or have a clever mechanism that clusters the servers where people have the option to play PvP and PVE 24/7.

Your choice.

I didn't say either it IS one or the other. Read again: I said: "So group based activity on "one realm" servers should be limited both in zones and (max) levels."
You can have group based single server activity IF you limit the spread out in both content and "levels".

War could have easely solved the problem by offering clustered server scenarios where the overall outcomes of these scenarios could have had a meaning on the single focused RvR from zone to zone on each server.

ALL group play in War was too spread out, much too fragmentated, much too dependant on single realm pops.

BTW: The low end PVE PQ's were unplayable the moment everyone leveled out of them.

---------

The only solution to this is having group based instanced servers (both for PvP and PVE) IN ADDITION to single server realm solo and group play (but the single server group element only  fixed in the highest levels and concentrated zones).

 Everyone WANTS to play 24/7 in both SOLO or GROUP play in both PvE or PvP. That's how patch 3.3 will implement it.

That's the way to go. The rest is dreaming. And btw EVE is VERY much server clustered.

Originally posted by Cephus404

 If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!

I don't know about other games, but not in WoW or Warhammer. You can't even touch mobs that high above you. I think you knew that, though.

  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

No rewards at all when your group wipes within 10 seconds. Even if you could beat such mobs - WoW gives crap xp in relation to the mobs' difficulty. Warhammer is much better in that respect, but in both - you couldn't USE any of the gear that dropped.

In other words, you are making a ridiculous claim.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

The difficulty is not matched by the rewards the game offers for pushing the difficulty envelope. Not to mention the inconvenience of putting and holding a group together.

Soloers don't know about those aspects, of course.

WoW and WARs imbalance issues stem from having 2 factions instead of 3+. We never had the problems in DAoC or PS that WoW and WAR do when it comes to open world PvP. Most fights in EVE are more unbalanced and spread out than WAR ever could be, but due to the one server system, the side that is the underdog changes from minute to minute.

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

 

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

His example may be too extreme since current game mechanics don't allow for such a huge lvl difference, however that does not mean that when you form a group you can't make it more challenging by finding a mob higher lvl than you that the mechanics do allow for.

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

Originally posted by Fyendiar

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

That is a matter of opinion. It is up to the game designers to decide how important each member of a group is or is not. In every MMO I have played, it takes less effort/skill to complete appropriate level solo content than it does to complete appropriate level group/raid content. This doesnt mean soloers have less skill or groupers/raiders have more skill, its just the way the devs made the game.

It is real easy for the makers of single player games to make easy/hard mode for their games but it would be a nightmare for Blizzard to make easy/hard mode single player content in WoW. Each piece of solo content would have to be balanced for 30 variations unless you think making content challenging for a Ret Paly would be fair to a Holy Priest? You have some games that have 20+ classes so for each one of them the devs would have to design single player content specifically for them and what company has the time or money to do that?

Originally posted by Romuluas

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

Depends on the game.  Hell, in Anarchy Online, as a level 160 fixer, I could routinely take on level 210+ mobs solo with no problem.  Groups would take on mobs 70+ levels above them.

The fact is, it's always harder to play solo than it is to play as a group.  You have to be completely self-sufficient, you don't have a healer standing out of harm's way healing you like crazy, you don't have a tank, you don't have a DDer, you have to do it all yourself.  That's *ALWAYS* harder than being part of a group.

Try again.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Cephus404

 If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!

I don't know about other games, but not in WoW or Warhammer. You can't even touch mobs that high above you. I think you knew that, though.

  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

No rewards at all when your group wipes within 10 seconds. Even if you could beat such mobs - WoW gives crap xp in relation to the mobs' difficulty. Warhammer is much better in that respect, but in both - you couldn't USE any of the gear that dropped.

In other words, you are making a ridiculous claim.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

The difficulty is not matched by the rewards the game offers for pushing the difficulty envelope. Not to mention the inconvenience of putting and holding a group together.

Soloers don't know about those aspects, of course.

There's no reward if you get killed regardless of the way you play.  Attacking a mob that you know is going to get you killed is foolish no matter how you play.

And sorry, but you take the good with the bad.  There are inherent strengths and weaknesses to every game play mode.  You don't get extra because you CHOOSE to play a particular way.  Geez, you people need to rent a clue.

Originally posted by Cephus404

That's *ALWAYS* harder than being part of a group.

Try again.

That is your opinion, not a fact.

Try again.

Originally posted by Cephus404

And sorry, but you take the good with the bad.  There are inherent strengths and weaknesses to every game play mode.  You don't get extra because you CHOOSE to play a particular way.  Geez, you people need to rent a clue.

That would be you, actually. If grouping (which is far more inconvenient and problematic than soloing) is not rewarded better than soloing, then the game - in effect - punishes grouping.

If a certain play style is more difficult (for whatever reason), then it needs to be more highly rewarded, or the great majority won't participate.

Clear?

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Cephus404

And sorry, but you take the good with the bad.  There are inherent strengths and weaknesses to every game play mode.  You don't get extra because you CHOOSE to play a particular way.  Geez, you people need to rent a clue.

That would be you, actually. If grouping (which is far more inconvenient and problematic than soloing) is not rewarded better than soloing, then the game - in effect - punishes grouping.

If a certain play style is more difficult (for whatever reason), then it needs to be more highly rewarded, or the great majority won't participate.

Clear?

Hmm. Hypothetically speaking would you then be happy having a difficult solo encounter be more rewarding than a pish-easy tank and spank 25-man raid boss? Assuming both required equal levels of preparation.

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Hmm. Hypothetically speaking would you then be happy having a difficult solo encounter be more rewarding than a pish-easy tank and spank 25-man raid boss? Assuming both required equal levels of preparation.

That would have to be a seriously challenging and time consuming encounter to equal the time and effort of 25 people. It would be interesting to see though.

I'm an advocate of diversity, hence I don't like this idea.

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

 

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

 

His example may be too extreme since current game mechanics don't allow for such a huge lvl difference, however that does not mean that when you form a group you can't make it more challenging by finding a mob higher lvl than you that the mechanics do allow for.

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

I would love nothing less then to beleive what you are saying, except for one little flaw in what you say. Even back in EQ days soloers complained they couldnt get the same gear that groups got and it wasnt fair. I dont mean to say that all soloers are this way, as I know they arent being a soloer myself. But lets face facts, soloers have always wanted to get the same amount of xp as a group without having to group, they wanted the same rewards without the same risk, say what you want, spin it how you want but thanks to WoW soloers have gotten what they cried about not having for years and now that isnt even good enough for them anymore. They wanted to be able to do quests solo, they can, but now they complain that quests are boring.

Well guess kids (figure of speach) you cant have your cake and eat it too. This is how you wanted the genre to go and this is how it went. Personnally I still play EQ most of the time because Im not being handed anything. Hell I even remeber when getting epic actually ment something, can you say the same about epic gear in WoW or any game since? I know I cant.

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Fyendiar

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

That is a matter of opinion. It is up to the game designers to decide how important each member of a group is or is not. In every MMO I have played, it takes less effort/skill to complete appropriate level solo content than it does to complete appropriate level group/raid content. This doesnt mean soloers have less skill or groupers/raiders have more skill, its just the way the devs made the game.

It is real easy for the makers of single player games to make easy/hard mode for their games but it would be a nightmare for Blizzard to make easy/hard mode single player content in WoW. Each piece of solo content would have to be balanced for 30 variations unless you think making content challenging for a Ret Paly would be fair to a Holy Priest? You have some games that have 20+ classes so for each one of them the devs would have to design single player content specifically for them and what company has the time or money to do that?

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience. I added the word "often" for a reason and that is because sometimes a group encounter is indeed made in a way that each member matters as much as the next, however those encounters are rare, extremely rare. Most often they pretend every member counts by making it so that a total moron can screw it up for the entire raid. Encounters like that don't reward skill, they punish moronic behaviour. If such an encounter is made for 20 players, it is easier to do with 15 average players than 19 skilled ones and 1 idiot.

Your second remark however I agree with, it is much easier to balance an encounter for 20 people. You know why it is easier? Yes you gave some excellent reasons why and I agree with those, but I will give you one very important extra reason: in solo encounters the abilities of that class are far more important than in group encounters. It is easier to balance things out for a big group because the skills of the individual are less important and I use skill in the broadest meaning here, playerskills and characterskills.

I agree that it is harder to do, it is much harder to make good challenging content for soloplayers than it is for teams, but does that mean we should stop asking for it? Does that mean it can't be done? Making an mmo is much harder than making Pong, yet somehow we managed to get there, didn't we?

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by Romuluas

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

Depends on the game.  Hell, in Anarchy Online, as a level 160 fixer, I could routinely take on level 210+ mobs solo with no problem.  Groups would take on mobs 70+ levels above them.

The fact is, it's always harder to play solo than it is to play as a group.  You have to be completely self-sufficient, you don't have a healer standing out of harm's way healing you like crazy, you don't have a tank, you don't have a DDer, you have to do it all yourself.  That's *ALWAYS* harder than being part of a group.

Try again.

Well I never played AO, but in EQ I was a Sk, and I soloed most of the time, and to be honest, It was always easier for me to solo then to group. Soloing I didnt need to worry about a puller who wouldnt listen if the cleric was oom and pull 5 mobs. I didnt have to worry about a healer that went ghost AFK on me in the middle of a fight, or groupies going LD in the middle of a fight.

Now I dont know what kinds of groups you were in, but me I was always in groups that took on raid mobs except for raid bosses.We didnt stay in the areas everyone else grinded. Luckily for me when I did group I was usually with the same people and we worked good together, but I had my share of pick up groups, adn those were the ones that killed me the most.

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Ilvaldyr

Hmm. Hypothetically speaking would you then be happy having a difficult solo encounter be more rewarding than a pish-easy tank and spank 25-man raid boss? Assuming both required equal levels of preparation.

That would have to be a seriously challenging and time consuming encounter to equal the time and effort of 25 people. It would be interesting to see though.

Would it though?

How much "time and effort" goes into a 25-man tank and spank fight? .. my personal opinion is "very little"; an opinion that I base on several years of top-tier raiding in WoW. If we're directly comparing the "time and effort" involved on the individual level, it doesn't take much to log onto the game, join the raid and travel to the target.

It's no more "time and effort" than a solo player would take in doing the same.

The crucial stage is what happens after that; the encounter itself.

If a 25-man "farm status" tank and spank encounter can be beaten in 2 minutes with a success rate that is virtually guaranteed; should that not be considered far less individually rewarding than a solo encounter that takes 5 minutes and has a 50/50 chance of success?

I've specifically used the word "individual" in this hypothetical. I'm sure that someone will make the argument that raiding is more "difficult" because it takes a lot of "effort" and "time" to get 25 people online at the same time. I've never found this to be the case.

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Originally posted by Romuluas

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by madeux

They're not happy with that though.... they want everyone to have to be forced to group.  You must conform, or go away.

Which is exactly true.  That's why they want to ramp up the difficulty so that *NO ONE* can solo, or why they want to bribe everyone with excessive rewards so *EVERYONE* will want to group.  They're just not honest about it.  If they want challenge, like they claim they do, then why don't they just go after challenging content?  Take their level 10 group up against level 50 mobs.  That'll be a challenge!  They'll get a huge amount of XP, a massive amount of loot and a ton of cool gear drops that no one else has access to at level 10.

But no... they'd rather whine about how unfair it is.

 

Yes because a guild of 100 people at lvl 10 can easily take on a a lvl 50 mob, pull your head out from between your legs. If there is a game where players can actually do that then it should be taken off the market now. My Question for all the solo players and solo content defender is this, why do you need things handed to you on a planter? Whyare you affraid to work hard for what you want? You know the funny thing is, these questions can even be asked about people in RL.

 

His example may be too extreme since current game mechanics don't allow for such a huge lvl difference, however that does not mean that when you form a group you can't make it more challenging by finding a mob higher lvl than you that the mechanics do allow for.

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

I would love nothing less then to beleive what you are saying, except for one little flaw in what you say. Even back in EQ days soloers complained they couldnt get the same gear that groups got and it wasnt fair. I dont mean to say that all soloers are this way, as I know they arent being a soloer myself. But lets face facts, soloers have always wanted to get the same amount of xp as a group without having to group, they wanted the same rewards without the same risk, say what you want, spin it how you want but thanks to WoW soloers have gotten what they cried about not having for years and now that isnt even good enough for them anymore. They wanted to be able to do quests solo, they can, but now they complain that quests are boring.

Well guess kids (figure of speach) you cant have your cake and eat it too. This is how you wanted the genre to go and this is how it went. Personnally I still play EQ most of the time because Im not being handed anything. Hell I even remeber when getting epic actually ment something, can you say the same about epic gear in WoW or any game since? I know I cant.

You make the same mistake in my eyes that many before you have made. Many of those complaining that they can't get the same rewards without raiding are not asking for free handouts, they are asking for equally challenging ways within their playstyle to get rewards of equal quality.
 

Your example of what WoW did is flawed, yes everyone can get epics now, but no soloplayer can get as good gear as a raider does in any way still. Blizzard has not listened to those asking for equal rewards through challenging solo content, they added easy to get "catch up" gear for starting raiders.

What they need to do is actually differentiate the gameplay between team and solo play.  Don't try to shoehorn in similar gameplay to the two different styles.   Make it almost feel like different games solo vs team.

Have players earn different abilities depending on whether they are earning XP as a team and XP solo.

Solo play really came to the forefront when people were playing the early games (EQ, DAOC, FF11, etc) where grouping was practically mandatory, and not being able to actually do something for themselves when they couldn't find a group. 

I would much rather run around in a group than I would play solo.  But I hate spending time to put a group together, and then watch it fall apart 45 min later, and then be stuck with two options:  Log off or wait for another group.

Separating the two groups of players is NOT the answer.  It actually just intensifies the problems from the two playstyles instead of actually addressing the underlying problem and fixing it.

Next the idea creates the problems of having to balance the content twice.  Once for solo play, once for group play.  Group play is balancing is alot more difficult than just saying "4x the HP".  

Eventually one playstyle is going to get the favor over the other.  Then the other server is going to end up the red-headed step child. 

Originally posted by Fyendiar

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Fyendiar

As for your question towards the solo players and solo content defenders: Since when does soloplay automaticly mean easier gameplay? The bigger the group, the less important the individual's skills often are. There is hardmode in many singleplayer games, do you really consider that needing things handed on a silver platter? Soloplay  does NOT have to mean easymode. You can have soloplay as hard or harder than any currently available groupcontent.

Stop trying to make out as if the teambased players are looking for a challenge and the soloplayers are trying to avoid it. It's nonsense, both are looking for a fun challenge within their prefered playstyle.

 

That is a matter of opinion. It is up to the game designers to decide how important each member of a group is or is not. In every MMO I have played, it takes less effort/skill to complete appropriate level solo content than it does to complete appropriate level group/raid content. This doesnt mean soloers have less skill or groupers/raiders have more skill, its just the way the devs made the game.

It is real easy for the makers of single player games to make easy/hard mode for their games but it would be a nightmare for Blizzard to make easy/hard mode single player content in WoW. Each piece of solo content would have to be balanced for 30 variations unless you think making content challenging for a Ret Paly would be fair to a Holy Priest? You have some games that have 20+ classes so for each one of them the devs would have to design single player content specifically for them and what company has the time or money to do that?

 

It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of experience. I added the word "often" for a reason and that is because sometimes a group encounter is indeed made in a way that each member matters as much as the next, however those encounters are rare, extremely rare. Most often they pretend every member counts by making it so that a total moron can screw it up for the entire raid. Encounters like that don't reward skill, they punish moronic behaviour. If such an encounter is made for 20 players, it is easier to do with 15 average players than 19 skilled ones and 1 idiot.

Your second remark however I agree with, it is much easier to balance an encounter for 20 people. You know why it is easier? Yes you gave some excellent reasons why and I agree with those, but I will give you one very important extra reason: in solo encounters the abilities of that class are far more important than in group encounters. It is easier to balance things out for a big group because the skills of the individual are less important and I use skill in the broadest meaning here, playerskills and characterskills.

I agree that it is harder to do, it is much harder to make good challenging content for soloplayers than it is for teams, but does that mean we should stop asking for it? Does that mean it can't be done? Making an mmo is much harder than making Pong, yet somehow we managed to get there, didn't we?

I have no problem with people asking for challenging solo content, I wouldnt mind seeing it myself. Im just against the blanket comments of solo requiring more skill or grouping takes less skill. Each one has its pros and cons. Have you ever solo'd a really really hard mob, then had someone come along to "help" with that same mob and you wipe? It happened a lot in EQ. Ive duo'd 5 man content in WoW then turned around and wiped with a full group on the same content. Grouping and soloing each have different skill sets and use different abilities so saying one is more difficult than the other is absurd unless the devs actually designed it to be easier.

Originally posted by Murashu

Originally posted by Cephus404

That's *ALWAYS* harder than being part of a group.

Try again.

That is your opinion, not a fact.

 

Try again.

Doesn't stop all the pro-groupers from posting their opinions as facts, even when they are contradicted by the evidence.

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Cephus404

And sorry, but you take the good with the bad.  There are inherent strengths and weaknesses to every game play mode.  You don't get extra because you CHOOSE to play a particular way.  Geez, you people need to rent a clue.

That would be you, actually. If grouping (which is far more inconvenient and problematic than soloing) is not rewarded better than soloing, then the game - in effect - punishes grouping.

If a certain play style is more difficult (for whatever reason), then it needs to be more highly rewarded, or the great majority won't participate.

Clear?

 

Clearly wrong, you mean.  The fact that grouping is inconvenient has nothing to do with gameplay.  A group made up of people who are well-suited for play together doesn't have the same kind of problems that you want to apply to groups.  Is it our fault that you pick assholes for your group?  Is it our fault that the people that you choose are slow, stupid, untalented slobs?  Who should we blame for this?  Hmmm...

The fact is, the great majority won't participate anyhow, nor should they if that's not their chosen style of play.  If you cannot attract people who already want to group, simply for the sake of grouping, then apparently, grouping isn't all that hot.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by MMO_Doubter

Originally posted by Cephus404

And sorry, but you take the good with the bad.  There are inherent strengths and weaknesses to every game play mode.  You don't get extra because you CHOOSE to play a particular way.  Geez, you people need to rent a clue.

That would be you, actually. If grouping (which is far more inconvenient and problematic than soloing) is not rewarded better than soloing, then the game - in effect - punishes grouping.

If a certain play style is more difficult (for whatever reason), then it needs to be more highly rewarded, or the great majority won't participate.

Clear?

 

 

Clearly wrong, you mean.  The fact that grouping is inconvenient has nothing to do with gameplay.  A group made up of people who are well-suited for play together doesn't have the same kind of problems that you want to apply to groups.  Is it our fault that you pick assholes for your group?  Is it our fault that the people that you choose are slow, stupid, untalented slobs?  Who should we blame for this?  Hmmm...

The fact is, the great majority won't participate anyhow, nor should they if that's not their chosen style of play.  If you cannot attract people who already want to group, simply for the sake of grouping, then apparently, grouping isn't all that hot.

It's probably really hard to play with a large, sweaty puerto rican woman sitting on your face... Therefor the rewards for those who enjoy this style of play should be greater.  Sorry, but it's a fact.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Doesn't stop all the pro-groupers from posting their opinions as facts, even when they are contradicted by the evidence.

And by evidence you mean your opinion?

Originally posted by madeux

It's probably really hard to play with a large, sweaty puerto rican woman sitting on your face... Therefor the rewards for those who enjoy this style of play should be greater.  Sorry, but it's a fact.

Nah, it's pretty easy actua...

I say too much.