A plea for further refinement of the Duty Roulette algorithm

[Lordfurious]

LI like your ideas and agree wholeheartedly that DF needs fixing. While leveling my 60's to 70 I have notice raid, Guildhests, and trials give 0 incentive for high level player to do them. If I were to do all 3 the "bonus" experience would move the overall experience bar less than one inch. I avoid 0 incentive DF instances at all cost. I would like to see increases as the whole purpose of incentive was meant to entice veteran players to help new players. Sorry new players.

[Djinnrb]

It sounds like the issue isnt the duty roulette but the level sync system. I think all your abilities should be usable but your stats are scaled so your not OP (even thought you should be a little OP).

[Taramin]

It sounds like the issue isnt the duty roulette but the level sync system. I think all your abilities should be usable but your stats are scaled so your not OP (even thought you should be a little OP).

Problem with this, like I said before, is super elitist people seeing a non-synced player in their party, and kicking them to fish for someone with more abilities unlocked. You can't make any one player have an advantage (outside gear), or jerks will ruin it.

[Djinnrb]

Problem with this, like I said before, is super elitist people seeing a non-synced player in their party, and kicking them to fish for someone with more abilities unlocked. You can't make any one player have an advantage (outside gear), or jerks will ruin it.

I HIGHLY doubt this would EVER happen. That would waste so much time and those elitists that you mentioned only care about their time. It would be counter productive.

[Taramin]

People boot new tanks for not pulling wall to wall when they aren't geared for it, I don't see why they wouldn't boot a class that hasn't gotten it's AoE/Tank stance/damage combo yet. People get irate when first timers get a long one-time CS in ARR dungeons, like the end of Toto-rak or Stone Vigil and don't skip.

[Shurrikhan]

When queuing an incomplete party, you're first filling spots for someone who queued for a specific dungeon that nobody is queuing for. As Fish points out, more people have access to and are queuing for lower level dungeons, which increases the probability that you'll end up in an early dungeon. Then, there will probably be more people queuing for Stormblood dungeons than for Heavensward dungeons, due in part to Stormblood being the current expansion, and because people can choose to skip to Lv60 if they want.


If you queue a complete party or end up matched with all roulette runners, random is random.

Though true, this is also irrelevant. The request here is that the roulette, quite simply, not be random. If 4 players are grouped together merely due to ticket position, rather than aiding anyone else's specific queue, then perhaps it should limit the roulette to dungeons within, say, 10 levels of them, or at least disproportionately favor the probability tables for dungeons nearer in level to each of said party members?

Then it begs the issue, what would be the point of Roulettes such as 50/60, 70 and Expert where you don't actually lose that many levels queuing up for them, as opposed to using Leveling roulette and getting something like Sastasha which creates a big difference in min/max levels. Like I get what people are saying, though we may have groups purposely going through the PF recruiting high level players to influence getting a duty no less than 10 levels difference, while the players who actually need the duties (for MSQ) could suffer longer queue times as a result of those bypassing to use PF before the DF.

I'd be fine with that, honestly. When doing Leveling Roulette daily for Cracked Clusters, less than one run per week had even a single member under level 50 (usually quite a bit greater), despite continuously sending me through Copperbell Mines. My one and only first-time completion bonus run (the Aery, for one of the DPS) over a couple months of gathering materia was nice, but frankly, past those first completions necessary for MSQ, I wouldn't be that bothered by some players making PF runs instead so long the bonus also convenienced non-PFers enough to make it seem worth queuing up for Leveling Roulette at all, where they previously wouldn't have. And I suspect it would.

Heck, you can even provide a consolation prize for "dungeons in need", similar to first-time completion bonuses. "This was a dungeon in need. You will receive an additional <X number> of <Y currency> at the completion of the instance."

[Kurando]

snip

Then it begs the issue, what would be the point of Roulettes such as 50/60, 70 and Expert where you don't actually lose that many levels queuing up for them, as opposed to using Leveling roulette and getting something like Sastasha which creates a big difference in min/max levels. Like I get what people are saying, though we may have groups purposely going through the PF recruiting high level players to influence getting a duty no less than 10 levels difference, while the players who actually need the duties (for MSQ) could suffer longer queue times as a result of those bypassing to use PF before the DF.

[Rongway]

Though true, this is also irrelevant. The request here is that the roulette, quite simply, not be random.

It is relevant. It's a roulette. Adding bias will allow abuses such as this:

we may have groups purposely going through the PF recruiting high level players to influence getting a duty no less than 10 levels difference, while the players who actually need the duties (for MSQ) could suffer longer queue times as a result of those bypassing to use PF before the DF.

Assume that the people who queue up as complete parties will still queue up as complete parties regardless. That means even if they are more likely to queue up, it won't help any additional people needing fills. However, such a change could reduce the number of incomplete parties queuing up, as people who are not currently queuing as complete parties might start queuing up as complete parties in order to bias their roulettes toward more current dungeons. Therefore adding a bias to the roulette would be a bad thing.

Roulettes aren't there to serve the needs of complete parties. Any accommodations added to roulettes should be for the benefit of the people who need them; not the people who want to run them without contributing to the people they're meant to help.

[Makeda]

While I understand the need for keeping ARR dungeons accessible to new players...

As a vet player since beta I have HAD IT with daily ARR dungeons in my leveling roulette, especially when at level 60+.

I would say (written as if I was writing this for 5.x)... First put together the 4 people in the queue that have been there the longest for their respective roles...

Then:

If anyone's under 50, they set what can be run, and it's 80% the highest they can do, 20% pure random.
If everyone is >= level 50: 90% odds of a dungeon over 50
If everyone is >= level 60: 80% odds of a dungeon over 60, 10% for <50, 10% 50-60 dungeon.
If everyone is >= level 70: 70% odds of a dungeon over 70, 20% over 60, 5% for <50, 5% for 50-60 dungeon.
If everyone is 80, it's 100% something from 71 to the last BEFORE expert.

And then... once the level-range is set, pick the dungeon that has the lowest run count among the players.

so if 4 people's combined run totals for Dungeon A is 53 times, B is 372 times, and C is 9 times - we're running C, with a 5% chance it's random between the 3 instead.

[Kewitt]

The job in need, needs to be more live. I've queued at Tank or Healer job in need and didn't get a queue switch to Healer or Tank and got in right away.