Difficulty hiearchy (PvE)

[kikix12]

Extreme trials
Savage raids
Ultimate trials

I'd say these are pretty set in stone as the last three in that order as far as the community at large appears to grade them on these forums and on YouTube, so far as I can see. However, I would think that it's not as clear-cut for Alliance Raid and Normal Raid.

Those seem to be on a somewhat similar "difficulty" in design, but due to high dependency on teamwork across three parties, alliance raids are pretty "hit or miss". There are ones that will be easier than normal raid, there are those that will be harder than normal raid ("Wiping City" speaks for itself). Then of course add the natural variable of players on top of that.

[Frizze]

I'd say these are pretty set in stone as the last three in that order as far as the community at large appears to grade them on these forums and on YouTube, so far as I can see. However, I would think that it's not as clear-cut for Alliance Raid and Normal Raid.

Those seem to be on a somewhat similar "difficulty" in design, but due to high dependency on teamwork across three parties, alliance raids are pretty "hit or miss". There are ones that will be easier than normal raid, there are those that will be harder than normal raid ("Wiping City" speaks for itself). Then of course add the natural variable of players on top of that.

A normal raid takes 4-6 players playing well for approx 10 mins. An alliance raid takes probly 10-12 players doing well for 40-60 mins. Players being significantly better or worse then the "playing well" standard(as well as how many beyond the minimum number needed to pass mechanics and DPS checks) either make the runs faster/easier or harder/slower/wipefest. So needing more people to play well for longer would mean that the alliance runs probly should be considered harder then normal raids, but all the extra bodies also means theres even more room for variation caused by exceptional people(on both sides of the fence - exceptionally good people making everything easier and exceptionally bad people dragging the world down closer to their level).

[MoroMurasaki]

A normal raid takes 4-6 players playing well for approx 10 mins. An alliance raid takes probly 10-12 players doing well for 40-60 mins. Players being significantly better or worse then the "playing well" standard(as well as how many beyond the minimum number needed to pass mechanics and DPS checks) either make the runs faster/easier or harder/slower/wipefest. So needing more people to play well for longer would mean that the alliance runs probly should be considered harder then normal raids, but all the extra bodies also means theres even more room for variation caused by exceptional people(on both sides of the fence - exceptionally good people making everything easier and exceptionally bad people dragging the world down closer to their level).

This is a really great comparison. I've been in Ridorana runs where I am the top dps on RDM by like a 2k margin and everything dies agonizingly slowly and then I've been there where I had a party comprised mostly of people with the Ultimate title and we swept through like it was nothing and skipped half the mechanics in the place.

I think ultimately the Alliance raids are more difficult than normal ones at least as a healer while it's likely the reverse for tanks and dps. The amount of distance people can travel can make keeping them alive through multiple stupid mistakes a real chore. Overall I think the requisite skill level for both kinds of content are tuned the same though.

[kikix12]

So needing more people to play well for longer would mean that the alliance runs probly should be considered harder then normal raids, but all the extra bodies also means theres even more room for variation caused by exceptional people (...)

I know all that, but that have nothing to do with the question the original poster presented, as far as I understand.

What I understood from the the original poster is question about the innate difficulty of the content.

Let's add some numbers. If we'll assume that that players have a skill level between 1 and 10 and raid have a difficulty of 5, then a person with a skill level of 5 is neither a dead weight nor a "safety valve". If the average of all players is 5 or more, the party clears.

Now, if we'll assume that every single other player in the party/alliance is at-level for the content, the only variable is the player in question. If the player is even one level below the contents difficulty, the party will fail.

When taking into consideration looking purely at mechanical difficulty, it is not clear-cut whether alliance or raids are more difficult since it varies from one to the other.

What I said is that I believe that some of the alliances are more difficult than some of the raids and vice versa for purely mechanical reasons, requiring from the individual players a higher level of skills to pass it. Whether it is compensated by highly skilled players or not is besides the point.

[MoroMurasaki]

I know all that, but that have nothing to do with the question the original poster presented, as far as I understand.

What I understood from the the original poster is question about the innate difficulty of the content.

Let's add some numbers. If we'll assume that that players have a skill level between 1 and 10 and raid have a difficulty of 5, then a person with a skill level of 5 is neither a dead weight nor a "safety valve". If the average of all players is 5 or more, the party clears.

Now, if we'll assume that every single other player in the party/alliance is at-level for the content, the only variable is the player in question. If the player is even one level below the contents difficulty, the party will fail.

When taking into consideration looking purely at mechanical difficulty, it is not clear-cut whether alliance or raids are more difficult since it varies from one to the other.

What I said is that I believe that some of the alliances are more difficult than some of the raids and vice versa for purely mechanical reasons, requiring from the individual players a higher level of skills to pass it. Whether it is compensated by highly skilled players or not is besides the point.

Using this scaling as a basis I think it sort of further pushes normal raids below Alliance raids.

In a vacuum you have 8 or 24 people sitting at a 5 in terms of skill and it all works out. No dead weight and no outstanding performances. That isn't how the actual world works though.

Since basically none of this content has a hard enrage the requisite skill level for dps is essentially don't die. With 8 party members alive there are no difficult dps checks to make as none of the "burn the add before the gague fills" situations are challenging. For any tank but the MT most fights are "you're a dps with worse numbers and more utility who occasionally grabs an add" so that makes the tank skill floor also rather low.

Healers are subjective but In terms of an actual minimum requirement there isn't much. If you aren't dpsing you're standing there a lot.

Not having players met these "5" benchmarks isn't particularly common but when it happens it sucks... but in an Alliance raid there are that many more people to pick up the slack. If I have 3 awful codps in a normal raid we are going to go really slow. If there are 3 of those same dps in an Alliance raid it's less of an issue.

Tl;dr - you can hide or be carried in alliance better than almost anywhere else especially as a dps. I think this makes alliance overall less difficult though I admit it's splitting hairs.

[kikix12]

Using this scaling as a basis I think it sort of further pushes normal raids below Alliance raids.

Tl;dr - you can hide or be carried in alliance better than almost anywhere else especially as a dps. I think this makes alliance overall less difficult though I admit it's splitting hairs.

I'm not really sure. You claim that using my scaling as a basis normal raids are pushed further below, meaning that it would make them easier. Then you proceed to say the exact opposite by elaborately explaining why alliance is supposedly easier. But that's besides the point.

I may understand the original question wrong, but how I see it and how I explained it is completely different than what you keep answering.

The question I see is "Which content will be progressively harder for me to do well in."
The question you keep answering is "Which content will make it progressively less likely for me to clear on each attempt."

They may seem like one and the same but they are two completely different things. The first question completely removes the viability of being carried, the second question does not. Effectively, nothing but savage and extreme have any difficulty variable for the second question because all the other content allows you to be carried. Asking for that is pointless.


Basically the difference is between individual skill level difficulty and party skill level difficulty. Those vary between the alliances and raids, whether comparing one to the other or within their own categories.

[MoroMurasaki]

I'm not really sure. You claim that using my scaling as a basis normal raids are pushed further below, meaning that it would make them easier. Then you proceed to say the exact opposite by elaborately explaining why alliance is supposedly easier. But that's besides the point.

I may understand the original question wrong, but how I see it and how I explained it is completely different than what you keep answering.

The question I see is "Which content will be progressively harder for me to do well in."
The question you keep answering is "Which content will make it progressively less likely for me to clear on each attempt."

They may seem like one and the same but they are two completely different things. The first question completely removes the viability of being carried, the second question does not. Effectively, nothing but savage and extreme have any difficulty variable for the second question because all the other content allows you to be carried. Asking for that is pointless.

I suppose we both interpreted the OP differently. If you're talking about places where you can perform well I suppose they're equal then as performance in either is basically a non-issue.

[kikix12]

I suppose we both interpreted the OP differently. If you're talking about places where you can perform well I suppose they're equal then as performance in either is basically a non-issue.

Performance in both is a very big issue. Both have mechanics with very much lethal effects and both can be screwed up beyond repair. Both require more activity than "spam while moving in a relatively small area on the field". There are varied numbers of people that can easily pick up the slack, but that does nothing, absolutely nothing, for people that actually care about their performance.

Some just don't want to be a dead weight. They will do the easier content first enough as to get the reflexes and such to a level that they can hold their own in a more difficult content. Not everything and not everyone in a game is about clearing. Learning parties in party finder are the best example of that, where clearing is secondary, getting your performance and knowledge of the fight up to par is the priority.

[MistakeNot]

[QUOTE=kikix12;4837545However, I would think that it's not as clear-cut for Alliance Raid and Normal Raid.[/QUOTE]

Indeed not. There you can't simply say that one is easier than the other since it varies so much between individual raids.
For example, Labyrinth of the Ancients and Syrcus Tower are very easy as long as you have a half-decent group. Dun Scaith on the other hand is not all that easy.
Same with the Normal raids - some are easy, and some are anything but easy. And then we have Coils, which doesn't appear in roulettes, which is hard when done synced.

[Akor]

Hardest content SE ever made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqcyQAjPEC0

Fight me!