Dungeon queue should be performance-based
Any class that can spec for multiple roles would have to complete each spec or they could only que for the spec that they passed in.
Paladins can Tank,Heal or DPS.
They would have to pass 3 different tests to be eligable to que for them.If they fail at the Healing and Tanking part then those 2 specs would be unavailable when they got into a qued group.
This way might help you get in for what you can do not just because of your class.
01/04/2011 9:41 PMPosted by DeviationI like this idea in a way, but I would want it to be very carefully implemented. What is the point of something like this anyway if the queue times go right through the roof because 3/4 of the population can't use RFD anymore.
I'm much more concerned about what happens to newer players. WoW really doesn't need more Caste System than it already has.
Not every veteran has an ego the size of the moon, and hates every player with less than five years of WoW experience. Just most of them :P I'd much more happily be RDF-matched by Attitude than some odd performance metric.
I agree with the attitude suggestion but like I said in my comment the queues are long enough as it is without adding in filters.
[quote] I think the idea still lends itself to your question. It'd be helpful to get more information than just through trial and error. Groups could benefit if they knew they didn't wipe because the healer didn't manage mana well enough, but because the DPS wasn't high enough, or boss adds weren't properly rounded up, etc.
I worry about taking this too far. We already have mechanics on boss fights where the players are warned SHIELD YOUR EYES. There is hand holding and then is is outright coddling.
I'd hate to see a system where there is a big yellow message on the screen that says DPS IS TO LOW or TANK: MORE THREAT. A great deal of the fun of playing the game comes through learning that on one's own.
Sure, I use the LFD tool all the time, and I get put in with randoms.. funny that but if i didn't want to play with other players I wouldnt be playing an MMORPG now would I?
I would however like to suggest working on the kicking tool, Not for when someone stuffs up; but for when they zone out for some unknown reason or afk or dc.
Ive got nothing against teaching people how certain strats work, thats what the game is about it's supposed to be a fun challenge not a grindfest.
For example, warlocks have no interrupt w/o using a felhunter. This means that your "dps test + CC + interrupt" massively handicaps non-affliction locks dps, making it artificially harder since as you said its instant fail if you miss a CC or interrupt.
Paladin tanks dont have an interrupt either really, AS is part of their dps/tps rotation and until later in a fight it cant be "saved" for interrupts (ie: they need a sizeable threat lead first), and even then they handicap their dps/tps to interrupt.
Interrupts can also miss if not hit capped, making this even harder if your gear is not ideal, meaning reforging or regearing just to pass a test. And CC can miss as well, but CC can be repplied, do you fail a mage who lets their caster based CC target up for a second? Its not going to destroy the group even if its up for 5 or more seconds, so why would you fail them if it resists or is broken early?
DK dps, as well as warriors, have no CC. This means that CCing has to be disabled for them, but that makes it easier for them to complete the "test." You can say "okay we'll put in a CC'd mob and make sure they dont break it" but even that is still simplistic because aoe and ST rotations are different.
You also suggest, by these tests, that no spell should go uninterrupted... so do you test the healer assuming this? or do you put pressure on him and let some of those casts through? Bear in mind, everything doesnt always go perfect, a dps might miss an interrupt or be stunned when a cast goes out, etc etc, allowing this cast to go through... do you take the "ideal" that this NEVER happens, or do you go for a realistic approach and assume that there are times when this stuff happens?
Then what? Do you create NPCs for these quests who will act as a team? Remember you're not the only one in a 5man, its a GROUP effort. Do you give the team a moonkin who can innervate the healer? Do you give the tank a rogue who will help tricks adds to him? Do you give the dps similar dps who buff their damage (ie: give the fire mage a moonkin and demo lock, and a frost dk doing the quest an npc warrior for sunder and paladin for might)?
You're talking about attempting to quantify not only skill, but group dynamics and social interactions and situational reactions. And it just, doesnt, work like that. If you miss, the team can recover. If someone else misses, this doesnt teach you how to help cover for them. It also doesnt teach you how to coordinate with a group or give you any understanding of what the other classes are capable of.
FFXI tried a similar system, the genkai 5 quest. You were forced to farm for an item and then complete a grueling quest fight. Your subjob was disabled, meaning you had ONLY your own classes skills, and you were pitted against a lvl 70*yourclass*/70monk (when normally your subclass could only be 1/2 of your mains level, ie :70/35). The npc was a beast and RNG was pretty stiff at times. The biggest issue though, is that it didnt actually teach you anything useful for most of the classes.
For example, redmage. The normal setup involved nuking the crap out of him after debuffing him, then sleeping him, resting, and repeating. The problem is, this taught you NOTHING about how to play a redmage in a group, you didnt have to buff or heal allies, you didnt have to coordinate with a skillchain to know when to burst.. but the biggest thing, is you didnt have to learn how to deal with a bad situation and make it through that situation alive.
Your idea is no different, it doesnt teach you how to function as a group, which is the biggest problem with this games players. All it does is teach them mediocre "basics" and punish them harshly for things, which then actually teaches them to forsake all else to make sure they interrupt that cast or pick up that add that might not be a huge deal if it hits a caster once or twice (they can kite ya know), even if it means they end up dying to the boss who has a different mechanic than the NPC dummy they fought AT LEAST THEY DID THEIR JOB AND HIT THAT CAST, RIGHT!?
Sorry, but your idea is a flop.
Now, I wouldnt be against some quests like this for FUN, with less harsh requirements.... for example, a "boss arena" like most single player games have, where you can pick to go in and fight a specific boss for lulz, either bosses in game or maybe even some special bosses, or maybe even two bosses at once or something (no need to actually make it possible if its not, since itd just be purely for lulz). Lots of people who are "bads" would play there just to have fun, and theyd indirectly get better at the game....
But I'm completely against your idea and the punishments it brings.
The second upside to this is it would mean essentially making better target dummies and making them for all roles. I don't know why there isn't a basic healer practice dummy. It would be easy enough, Dummy has health and once triggered, it starts to drop. The healer has to heal to keep it from reaching zero.
The same sort of basic stuff could be done for CC and Spell Interruption dummies.
The hardest one to set up would probably be the tank's dummy.
Finally, it would mean players would all get a bit more practice in. Even just as something to absorb damage, I was amazed at how much better I was with my rotation and timing after just 30 minutes on the target dummy. I try to work on them at least once a week now.
12/28/2010 12:49 AMPosted by ÂrcturusSurely you don't believe your que requirement will make a player who can perform his role well in all situations.
12/28/2010 12:35 AMPosted by SinkinglightI'm sure people have seen dps do under 5k at 85, while also seeing skilled players do over 5k at 80.
I'm probably one of those guys who does under 5k at 85. But who cares. I'm also probably not spec'd to instances either. But I can CC, control my aggro and not die. Works for me.
01/04/2011 9:30 PMPosted by DeviationYou know, you're right.
Subscription fees should be performance-based too. If you're going to give other people less of a game, certainly it would be fair to charge them less, wouldn't it?
I sort of agree, but then these players are not required to play the game. They can quit, and I believe that is the message Blizzard is giving them. They are not wanted in the game by most of the player base and by Blizzard themselves.
If they want to continue and be harassed by the players, not see very much end content, and now be evaluated to see if they are fit for random pugs then that is their choice.
01/04/2011 9:13 PMPosted by NeyunaSort of. One flaw with the current system, is if players fail in a pick-up group, they aren't told why they failed. People then tend to play the blame game, often directing malice at the healer(s).
So while I'm speaking more about class roles, I think the idea still lends itself to your question. It'd be helpful to get more information than just through trial and error. Groups could benefit if they knew they didn't wipe because the healer didn't manage mana well enough, but because the DPS wasn't high enough, or boss adds weren't properly rounded up, etc.
Hah, so like the Microsoft Paperclip. Except it could be a murloc or something that pops up on your screen and says "It looks like you're trying to dps. Would you like help?"
That would be amazing.
Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:
Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.
Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.
Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.