(Suggestion) Add minimum ilevel for roulettes based on your level

Either that, or lower the max ilvl sync. Lv 50 alliance is a joke, The last boss from Labyrinth is dying before the second Ancient flare now with shadowbringers, it's pathetic. I die a little inside everytime a get the same Lv50 thing everyday on roulettes.

Something has to be done.

I don't understand what penalty for leaving has to do with anything related to OP. One thing is completely other topic. Players have the right to not do what the don't want to do, they have a life, and it will become toxic the more penalties they add. Instead of penalties, nerf low level, and reward high level, that alone is better. But I don't want that, I would just change the max ilvl.
The problem is that players are lowering their ilvl to always get Lv 50 braindead content, while 60+ content get more and more queue time the more players know about this "cheese thing".
If they fixed the mechanics and max ilvl sync it wouldn't be as a joke as it is now.
Constantly buffing jobs also put them out of balance with low level content.
SE can't just care about end-game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoLupinos

I don't understand what penalty for leaving has to do with anything related to OP. One thing is completely other topic.

---

Imposing ilvl restriction will just make people that don't want higher level alliances to just drop when they get them. That's how the penalty is related. Which means the problem is still not solved even with the restriction. But I'm with more incentive than more punishment and restriction. You don't want to end up in a case where you prevent people from bothering with the roulette anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alucard135

Imposing ilvl restriction will just make people that don't want higher level alliances to just drop when they get them. That's how the penalty is related. Which means the problem is still not solved even with the restriction. But I'm with more incentive than more punishment and restriction. You don't want to end up in a case where you prevent people from bothering with the roulette anymore.

---

Getting 30 min penalty every time you get a undesired instance will get annoying very quicky and they will stop leaving for such a little effort of completing the duty.
Getting higher xp than normal ways is already enough of incentive. For me.
Sometimes I get other than Lv 50 content, and players don't leave. Again, leaving has nothing to do with OP, because it's not a problem, just a prediction based on "i think".
If roulletes are the best thing, I'm sure players will adapt to it, the same how players had adapted to the MSQ roullete. While I stopped doing, lots of players started because of the huge xp, it's the best.

People leave the Mentor roulette on a frequent basis despite the thirty minute penalty. It's not a concern lacking in precedent and conjured out of nowhere through mere speculation. The established trend is for a great many people to take the path of least resistance.

As stated earlier, I'd be all for the suggestion to be implemented if a suitable incentive could be offered to mitigate the negative effects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoLupinos

Getting 30 min penalty every time you get a undesired instance will get annoying very quicky and they will stop leaving for such a little effort of completing the duty.
Getting higher xp than normal ways is already enough of incentive. For me.
Sometimes I get other than Lv 50 content, and players don't leave. Again, leaving has nothing to do with OP, because it's not a problem, just a prediction based on "i think".
If roulletes are the best thing, I'm sure players will adapt to it, the same how players had adapted to the MSQ roullete. While I stopped doing, lots of players started because of the huge xp, it's the best.

---

It didn't stop people from leaving Castrum over and over till they get Praetorium. Or mentors that drop the moment they see an EX trial.

Also, those not leaving higher level roulettes are those that don't mind doing them, which I'm not saying are rare or something. But those that do, are already cheesing that by putting on low ilvl gear to get the level 50 ones. Those are the ones that would leave the moment they get queued into one that they don't like or know it will take longer to complete.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

People leave the Mentor roulette on a frequent basis despite the thirty minute penalty. It's not a concern lacking in precedent and conjured out of nowhere through mere speculation. The established trend is for a great many people to take the path of least resistance.

As stated earlier, I'd be all for the suggestion to be implemented if a suitable incentive could be offered to mitigate the negative effects.

---

Well, with the new changes to mentor system, I believe that mentor is a relative small percentage of the roullete players base now. Since the whole thing of the mentor system is to HELP players I would kinda of agree of leaving penalty for mentor to be higher. And I think that a new thread is more suited for that, since it will likelly get lost inside this one. I saw you ask about incentives. I said mine, but, could you please say yours?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alucard135

It didn't stop people from leaving Castrum over and over till they get Praetorium. Or mentors that drop the moment they see an EX trial.

Also, those not leaving higher level roulettes are those that don't mind doing them, which I'm not saying are rare or something. But those that do, are already cheesing that by putting on low ilvl gear to get the level 50 ones. Those are the ones that would leave the moment they get queued into one that they don't like or know it will take longer to complete.

---

We can all agree that the problem is not that the players are leaving or will leave from ex trials. It didn't stop people from completing castrum either, it's not a problem.
I think you are increasing the value of a minority about leaving, while the problem is elsewhere. The same minority that is responsible for lowering their ilvl and thus forcing the other 23 players to do Lv 50 instance. Do you see that changing the system will impact just this minor percentage of the players base, while benefiting everybody else? Including new players that are 51~79. I myself felt this on the queues on those levels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoLupinos

I saw you ask about incentives. I said mine, but, could you please says yours?

---

Something inspired by the accursed hoard that can be found in POTD/HOH. A special type of sack rewarded for the successful completion of any duty identified as being victim to a high number of players leaving if they get it. The sack should contain a wide range of potential rewards that are considered desirable, but the truly good stuff should be fairly rare. A few exclusive rewards that can only be found in the sack should be available - with the ability to trade them on the market board.

Some refinement would likely be necessary, but I believe something like that could work out well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Theodric

Something inspired by the accursed hoard that can be found in POTD/HOH. A special type of sack rewarded for the successful completion of any duty identified as being victim to a high number of players leaving if they get it. The sack should contain a wide range of potential rewards that are considered desirable, but the truly good stuff should be fairly rare. A few exclusive rewards that can only be found in the sack should be available - with the ability to trade them on the market board.

Some refinement would likely be necessary, but I believe something like that could work out well.

---

While leaving could potentially be an after problem, since they would need to do something to fix the ilvl cheese mechanic first, I was more keen to read about how to solve OP problem first. Good suggestion, but for the leaving after problem.

Now, for everybody, since a considerable amount of people in this thread is afraid of people leaving the content because it's not Lv 50 and thus making it impossible the complete, I must say that i don't believe that it will be a problem. Players still do manage to complete other roullete high level content now, what is the logic leading to this being a problem after the fix of the ilvl cheese?
As I already stated, a minority is responsible for lowering their ilvl and thus forcing the other 23 players to do Lv 50 instance. Fixing would just affect this minority, while benefiting the majority.

And for the ones that don't want to invest in their ilvl, they can do Deep Dungeons. It would populate it, and recover what roulletes are meant for, to ease the queue from all the intances included in the same roullete.

This idea would be worthless unless they increased the rewards given based on what alliance raid you got. As it is, in my opinion, alliance raids aren't worth doing in the first place right now, but that's besides the point. A 30 minute penalty isn't actually that bad when you would be potentially spending well over that in an alliance raid, that is prone to wipes - not because they necessarily cannot do it, but because others cannot do the mechanics or play their class to a sufficient level. However, in turn if the rewards are increased too substantially then you may get an issue where people won't ever want to do the old raids anymore either. Similar to MSQ roulette.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoLupinos

I think you are increasing the value of a minority about leaving, while the problem is elsewhere. The same minority that is responsible for lowering their ilvl and thus forcing the other 23 players to do Lv 50 instance. Do you see that changing the system will impact just this minor percentage of the players base, while benefiting everybody else? Including new players that are 51~79. I myself felt this on the queues on those levels.

---

If they are a minority, then there's no need for any solution at all. Since these minorities can be considered like any other level 50 player forcing the other 23 into the raids. So not really big enough to be considered a problem or have an effect on queue times. If this solution was enough to actually cause changes in queue times, then they really aren't a minority to begin with. And that's where the leaving issue becomes relevant.