People are deliberately ruining the story for others

[Duuude007]

It was 5 minutes or less for me last time I checked so this really didn't strike me as very likely being much of a problem.

And you expect it to be split evenly down the middle? Only 10 minutes if you split it to open and cs enforced queues?

Sorry... but that's adorably naive. People don't opt in for long queues if they don't have to, people don't opt for long dungeons if they don't have to. This would have the worst of both worlds, so to speak.

[Knahli]

And you expect it to be split evenly down the middle? Only 10 minutes if you split it to open and cs enforced queues?

Sorry... but that's adorably naive. People don't opt in for long queues if they don't have to, people don't opt for long dungeons if they don't have to. This would have the worst of both worlds, so to speak.

No, I explicitly said that I expect speed runs to remain being the most popular.

You'll still have people who have the time but don't feel it it's worth the reward and people who don't have the time and therefore won't even consider the idea. Even if most people still opt for speed runs, you will surely have a more notable collection of players offering themselves into the longer MSQ Roulette just so they can get "more" from a single run. I hear a lot of people like to watch Netflix while they Tank and PvP so I'm sure that even if it does turn out lop-sided, it will still be in favour of faster runs.

I am specifically talking about the Main Scenario Roulette whose tome bonus can only be accessed once per day. Next to no-one who intends on actively farming tomes by running MSQ dungeons over and over are going to choose the longer option. I was talking about targeting people who only planned on doing the daily roulette - which, I might add, could even include a few hardcore farmers regardless, assuming they weren't rushing and wanted to do anything else during the cutscene phases until they began the speed runs later on in the day.

Despite me always feeling bad for the new players, I don't want the longer runs to become the more popular roulette because I want those who do farm it to suffer as little fallout as possible were such a change to be implemented. The difference is that even if the queues for those pursuing a cutscene-driven version are significantly longer, it's still an option that allows them a better chance to have people joining for the same purposes/expectations than what they currently face at present. If you want to argue in favour of the very redundant option of using the Party Finder so much, then why can't people who actually want speed runs be the ones to set up premade farming parties that way just like they do for every other piece of content in the game? Even if a new player IS made aware that they can't just join Castrum and Prae like every other dungeon prior and expect to be able to view cutscenes just fine, they still face extreme difficulty finding anyone willing to help by setting up a PF. If roulette option for newbies was made more apparent or even prioritised, then experienced players who actually know what they are doing can set up the farming PF runs themselves as they do for pony farms and any other existing example in the game.

[Duuude007]

If you want to argue in favour of the very redundant option of using the Party Finder so much, then why can't people who actually want speed runs be the ones to set up premade farming parties that way just like they do for every other piece of content in the game?

They can and do. And that's kind of the point. When people can't have their special expectations met in a completely randomized party former, they form their own party. And the planet keeps spinning.

If you have a problem with how a party majority wants to progress, you can protest within reason, but disruptions are against EULA, so ultimately you have 3 other options: decide to suck it up, negotiate a compromise, or leave.

This applies to any party, with any group of people. Its called being pragmatic.

[Knahli]

They can and do. And that's kind of the point. When people can't have their special expectations met in a completely randomized party former, they form their own party. And the planet keeps spinning.

If you have a problem with how a party majority wants to progress, you can protest within reason, but disruptions are against EULA, so ultimately you have 3 other options: decide to suck it up, negotiate a compromise, or leave.

This applies to any party, with any group of people. Its called being pragmatic.

No, it's called being obtuse. Why are you so aggressively against the suggestion that new players have something implemented for them that allows them to experience the two dungeons as was intended? There are no "special" expectations here. That was the intended standard. You however, are holding them, a group of oblivious participants to a new set of dungeons, to the same standard one would expect of high level players who are experienced with the game and the dungeons in question. The only reasons those roulettes exist are so that the new players aren't waiting in impossible queues that can only be filled up by fellow new players at the same point in the questline. This game has the story and lore at it's core and a lot of people do enjoy it and do take it very seriously. There is nothing unreasonable about expecting some form of fix to be applied to a particular design that the devs and playerbase alike unanimously agree was ill-thought out.

I simply don't understand your argument. Are you that offended about another roulette cluttering up your DF or are you afraid of some 'Slippery Slope' fallacy? You are presenting no good reason whatsoever against my attempt to find some compromise that benefits both parties and allows them to experience the actual runs themselves as intended. Again, I am not suggesting my idea is flawless nor the most ideal solution imaginable, but you have yet to offer any reasonable argument as to why it's a bad idea. Your entire philosophy seems equatable to saying something like the Hall of the Novice was a bad feature and waste of time because "new players should simply learn to play the same way everyone else did, without any ~*~*hand-holding*~*~ ".

[Ashkendor]

You however, are holding them, a group of oblivious participants to a new set of dungeons, to the same standard one would expect of high level players who are experienced with the game and the dungeons in question.

No, most people aren't holding them to the same standard actually. I know I'd be pretty pissed if a veteran to the game decided to just afk through the entire dungeon and I'd probably kick them, whereas a new player I don't mind if they watch the cutscenes instead of participating. I honestly hope when 4.0 rolls around that they either get rid of these dungeons entirely or rework them somehow. I can see what they were aiming for but unfortunately it just doesn't stand the test of time. I don't think there's been a single week that's gone by without a thread about them, so it's obviously a huge issue that needs to be addressed. The thing is, I also think it should be addressed in an efficient way so as to minimize dev time spent on it.

[Duuude007]

No, it's called being obtuse.

...So your open volley is an attack. Keepin' it classy. But I digress.

Why are you so aggressively against the suggestion that new players have something implemented for them that allows them to experience the two dungeons as was intended?

Because we don't need a SECOND way to make that happen. They already can, they just don't want to do PF for some reason that we cannot fathom, and instead they would rather force their demands in conflict with the other people (the majority of people) who want to run it a different way.

There are no "special" expectations here. That was the intended standard.

People play differently. Some people have jobs, wives, kids, and limited time to get through content, and want to proceed quickly. Others want to sit down with popcorn and analyze every facet of every piece of dialogue before moving on. Both are perfectly valid, but both are also in great conflict with one another. If a player expects to be able to go at their own pace, they must either negotiate something with the party majority (whatever their plan may be), or find another party. Any deviation can potentially be considered as disruptive harassment.

You however, are holding them, a group of oblivious participants to a new set of dungeons, to the same standard one would expect of high level players who are experienced with the game and the dungeons in question.

No. No, we are not. We ARE, however, holding them to the expectation to understand that Duty finder is a queue of random people, and as such, progression is defined by a majority decision; Therefore, they can either ride the wave, negotiate a compromise with the party they land in, or leave and try their luck again/form their own party with their own rules.

The only reasons those roulettes exist are so that the new players aren't waiting in impossible queues that can only be filled up by fellow new players at the same point in the questline. This game has the story and lore at it's core and a lot of people do enjoy it and do take it very seriously.

'Impossible' is an extreme overexaggeration, I regularly see people use PF for story purposes. Those who pay attention to story should be more than capable of paying attention to the features of party finder.

There is nothing unreasonable about expecting some form of fix to be applied to a particular design that the devs and playerbase alike unanimously agree was ill-thought out.

No, except PF WAS the fix. So there's that.

I simply don't understand your argument.

Clearly.

Are you that offended about another roulette cluttering up your DF or are you afraid of some 'Slippery Slope' fallacy?

No, and no.

You are presenting no good reason whatsoever against my attempt to find some compromise that benefits both parties and allows them to experience the actual runs themselves as intended.

It is not a compromise when it takes away the very thing the majority joins for- efficient tomes. A compromise would be you giving up something, us giving up something, and ultimately everyone gets most of what they wanted. But we have already gone around in circles on this. The so-called "compromise" on your part is effectively "we won't boot you before the last boss dies". Which is laughable.

Again, I am not suggesting my idea is flawless nor the most ideal solution imaginable, but you have yet to offer any reasonable argument as to why it's a bad idea.

Its more in the light of "Why fix something that isn't broken". PF was implemented as a fix, and is simply being underutilized. that isnt my fault or your fault or even SE's fault per-say. We are trying to urge players to use it early and often, because it IS useful.

Your entire philosophy seems equatable to saying something like the Hall of the Novice was a bad feature and waste of time because "new players should simply learn to play the same way everyone else did, without any ~*~*hand-holding*~*~ ".

Wrong again. I would never argue such a toxic stance. It was a niche that needed to be filled, and now it has been filled. just like PF is a perfectly reasonable option here.

Step 1: open PF and recruit for cm or Praetorium.
Step 2: set the rules you want.
Step 3: get 4-7 more people to join. (why as few as 4? because then you are the majority of the party, and the rules people adhere to are already your rules.
step 4: you get your way.

[Niwashi]

People play differently. Some people have jobs, wives, kids, and limited time to get through content, and want to proceed quickly. Others want to sit down with popcorn and analyze every facet of every piece of dialogue before moving on. Both are perfectly valid, but both are also in great conflict with one another.

Which is why it's obtuse to so vehemently argue against a feature to let both groups have access to their own runs, and their own roulette. Group the people in a hurry with other people in a hurry and group the people who want the story with other people who want the story. Avoid this conflict ever coming up by not mixing people with both desires together. That's the request that you're arguing against here.

You'd get even faster runs (assuming that once there's another version for showing the story, SE would likely remove the cutscenes from the fast version of the duty altogether). If your goals were what you keep saying they are, you'd be delighted with that. So why aren't you?

[missybee]

Snippy Dippy Doo

Yeah, but...wouldn't that dilute the pool even further? I mean, I'd imagine as it stands there is only a limited number of people who actually do Story Roulette. Adding an additional "Long-Ass Cutscene Roulette" would likely have very few participants unless the reward was REALLY good.

I guess my point is that you are likely to be in queue for Long-Ass Cutscene Roulette so long that you would probably be better off just attempting to create a PF, thus potentially rendering it moot.

[Knahli]

No, most people aren't holding them to the same standard actually. I know I'd be pretty pissed if a veteran to the game decided to just afk through the entire dungeon and I'd probably kick them, whereas a new player I don't mind if they watch the cutscenes instead of participating. I honestly hope when 4.0 rolls around that they either get rid of these dungeons entirely or rework them somehow. I can see what they were aiming for but unfortunately it just doesn't stand the test of time. I don't think there's been a single week that's gone by without a thread about them, so it's obviously a huge issue that needs to be addressed. The thing is, I also think it should be addressed in an efficient way so as to minimize dev time spent on it.

I never at any point said "most people". I was directly talking to the person I had quoted. However, you just said you hope they "rework" them somehow, and I have suggested a possible way to do that which creates absolutely minimal perceivable effect on speed runners, but somehow I am still reading replies that respond as though I am suggesting a revamp that takes something away from non-new players which is honestly frustrating because I don't know how much more clearly I can attempt to present my point.

...So your open volley is an attack. Keepin' it classy. But I digress.

No it was not. It was my understanding that it was synonymous with being called stubborn or difficult, only in a less deliberate fashion. If that is incorrect and it came across negatively then I apologise.



From this point on I am going to try and break down my responses into smaller more readable points. It is not intended to be condescending but I am unsure of how else I convey myself without being misunderstood again and again.

Because we don't need a SECOND way to make that happen. They already can, they just don't want to do PF for some reason that we cannot fathom, and instead they would rather force their demands in conflict with the other people (the majority of people) who want to run it a different way.

1. New players almost certainly never had to use the PF before now and possibly are unaware it even exists.
2. PF relies on recruiting seven strangers willing to give up a ton of free time for nothing in return.
3. I sympathise with new players who are forced to skip cutscenes/miss battles. Regardless, I never once came even remotely close to suggesting the majority of the party should bend to their demands. You are confusing me for other posters.

People play differently. Some people have jobs, wives, kids, and limited time to get through content, and want to proceed quickly. Others want to sit down with popcorn and analyze every facet of every piece of dialogue before moving on. Both are perfectly valid, but both are also in great conflict with one another. If a player expects to be able to go at their own pace, they must either negotiate something with the party majority (whatever their plan may be), or find another party. Any deviation can potentially be considered as disruptive harassment.

1. This is the problem my suggestion attempts to solve.
2. My suggestion enables speed runners to avoid being partied with new players who wish to watch cutscenes. Their current reward will not be reduced.
3. My suggestion enables new players to be partied with both new and experienced players willing to engage in longer runs, with experienced players offered a significant DAILY roulette reward of extra tomes to enhance queue times.
4. Speed runs will certainly remain the most popular choice and therefore experienced players should not suffer any significant queue times as a result of a split option.

No. No, we are not. We ARE, however, holding them to the expectation to understand that Duty finder is a queue of random people, and as such, progression is defined by a majority decision; Therefore, they can either ride the wave, negotiate a compromise with the party they land in, or leave and try their luck again/form their own party with their own rules.

1. No other piece of content in the game causes a disruption similar to this. There is no lesson to learn from forcing them to join speed runners and hope they are among the 1% willing to wait.
2. The current system comes down to a majority vote, with one side getting shunted as a result. My suggestion erases the mixture of people seeking different types of runs. i.e No compromise necessary. No differing expectations.

'Impossible' is an extreme overexaggeration, I regularly see people use PF for story purposes. Those who pay attention to story should be more than capable of paying attention to the features of party finder.

1. Before the introduction of undersized parties, I set up PF on multiple occasions for friends I invited to the game to experience the dungeons properly. No-one ever joined despite waiting for over 40 minutes. I am on Balmung.
2. Expecting new players to know about and use the PF all of a sudden without any warning that is it even necessary is holding them to the same standard as experienced players like us who understand those runs are exceptions to the rule.
3. With my suggestion, even if speed run queues unexpectedly suffered, experienced players who are well aware of the existence of the PF and it's utility for setting up speed runs can continue to function as normal that way.

No, except PF WAS the fix. So there's that.

1. Explain to me at what point in the journey from 1-50 are players typically expected to set up Party Finders as opposed to simply queuing via the DF. Tell me what hint exists in-game that players need to set up a PF at all, a hint that tells them they can expect (very rightfully) unobliging players in Castrum and Praetorium runs. Do so, and maybe I can begin to humour the idea that new players are supposed to know any better.

Clearly.

1. Though apparently stemming from the fact that you are seemingly confusing other poster's beliefs with my own simply because they share the sentiment that the matter of new players getting shafted should be actively remedied with some form of update.

It is not a compromise when it takes away the very thing the majority joins for- efficient tomes. A compromise would be you giving up something, us giving up something, and ultimately everyone gets most of what they wanted. But we have already gone around in circles on this. The so-called "compromise" on your part is effectively "we won't boot you before the last boss dies". Which is laughable.

1. Please explain to me in detail what you think my suggestion is because judging from this line alone, I am having serious doubts that you even read what it was.

Its more in the light of "Why fix something that isn't broken". PF was implemented as a fix, and is simply being underutilized. that isnt my fault or your fault or even SE's fault per-say. We are trying to urge players to use it early and often, because it IS useful.

1. Finding a manner in which to promote the PF AND notifying new players that they should use it before initiating Castrum/Prae along with an explanation why would be a positive step and certainly better than nothing, but it would not be even remotely effective.
2. Your suggestion relies on grand generosity and sheer luck in addition to the massive expense of a new player's time which they must invest in waiting.
3. My suggestion at worst has a marginal impact on DF speed run queues while creating a secondary option that significantly increases queue time for new players. If this is really that much an issue, the speed runners can set up the PF.
4. Speed run PF = easy and fast results. Cutscene PF = Barren and desolate. It has never worked in my experience.

Wrong again. I would never argue such a toxic stance. It was a niche that needed to be filled, and now it has been filled. just like PF is a perfectly reasonable option here.

1. If you think waiting an hour or more in the PF to get into a single run(if you're lucky) and call that a reasonable option then you are out of your mind.
2. If you think a Speed Run PF listing will take even fractionally as long to fill up then you are deluded. That is even while ignoring the fact that my suggestion caters to neither experienced nor new players necessarily needing to use the PF in the first place.

Step 1: open PF and recruit for cm or Praetorium.
Step 2: set the rules you want.
Step 3: get 4-7 more people to join. (why as few as 4? because then you are the majority of the party, and the rules people adhere to are already your rules.
step 4: you get your way.

Step 5. Wait to see how your luck fares.
Step 6. If extremely lucky, queue with 4 or so members and ignorantly impose a very long run on the 3 or so randoms who were fairly anticipating a typical speed run. (Skip step 7.)
Step 7. If unlucky, proceed to wait for upwards of an hour for one person to join before eventually disbanding in frustration.



Or.... reverting to my suggestion.

-Main Scenario Roulette (No CS)---------------------[Daily Tome Bonus: 120 poetics ]
-Main Scenario Roulette (Progression-locked)-------[Daily Tome Bonus: 240 Poetics~]

Speed Runner A:
I don't have time for this, I'll take option 1 and just do multiple speed runs for efficiency

Speed Runner B:
I don't feel like farming Poetics that hard today and can honestly afford the wait, I'll just do my daily roulette, pick the lighter, more rewarding second option and just alt-tab while the newbies enjoy their cutscenes.

Speed Runner C:
The speed run version has slow queues today...... I better set up a PF. People will join that quickly anyways.

[Niwashi]

And you expect it to be split evenly down the middle? Only 10 minutes if you split it to open and cs enforced queues?

Sorry... but that's adorably naive. People don't opt in for long queues if they don't have to, people don't opt for long dungeons if they don't have to. This would have the worst of both worlds, so to speak.

People generally just opt for the best rewards. That might give the fast run roulette a bit of difficulty, but I doubt it would be enough to create a problem, not when, as Knahli pointed out here, we're starting from such a glut of people (and the extra rewards might draw even more people into it). Other roulettes have more than 4 dungeons to divide people between and still do just fine, so I'm sure this one can survive being split into 2 and 2, even if it's a slightly uneven 2 and 2.