PDA

View Full Version : Re:Re:Re:UF Raid Design: Atrocious



Newsfiend
02-16-2010, 02:00 PM
Fairydust wrote:


Elidroth wrote:


It's pretty simple really.

SoD was WAY too easy and we knew it. We also knew that changing SoD to be harder AFTER release would only penalize those people who hadn't been farming it already.

With Underfoot, we purposely made things HARD. Partly because people ASKED for a difficult expansion, and partly because we understand that tuning things down is better for player perception than tuning them up. If I tune a raid down, it feels like tuning. If I tune a raid up, it feels like punishment.

Also keep in mind, it's VERY difficult to get an accurate assessment of raid difficulty in beta testing. If every guild was built exactly the same and played exactly the same it would be easy, but no two guilds are the same.. ever. So we test raid X with guild X, and they find it pretty good and challenging, and then guild Y comes along and destroys the same raid, even though they're at the same capability level.

There are other issue here as well, but I'd be writing a novel to cover it all. http://www.mapfiend.net/eq/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif

Suffice to say, the Underfoot raids are going to get another tuning pass soon.

Oh.. and you can blame me for Masked Invaders, but at the same time, I noticed that quite a few guilds beat it this weekend. So you can blame me for the adjustments too http://www.mapfiend.net/eq/images/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif


Not too sound like I'm ripping on you. But the raid thread gets a nice response from you and the UF named one(effecting groupers) gets a one liner that I didn't think was very clear.

There really isn't much more to say on the named stuff until we make changes honestly. We had a short meeting and pretty much agreed that we need to make changes to the way named spawns are setup, but until we have specifics, I don't really have much more info to give.



More... (http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/posts/list.m?topic_id=161028&post_id=2397120#2397120)