Labyrinth and Syrcus Tower...

[NessaWyvern]

I wonder why people like to run LoA over and over. The void ark raid is easier and doesn't have the risk of wipe that LoA does with the platforms. I would also love to see void ark more, because I am seriously bored with the ARR raids.

[ForteNightshade]

I wonder why people like to run LoA over and over. The void ark raid is easier and doesn't have the risk of wipe that LoA does with the platforms. I would also love to see void ark more, because I am seriously bored with the ARR raids.

Two reasons

1) Void Ark requires having gear below i205 to avoid Weeping City, which most people don't have.
2) It allows World of Darkness, which people still wipe on.

Basically, it's just easier to strip naked.

[PyurBlue]

Allowing players to choose won't accomplish anything, and defeats the point of even having a roulette. People are going to pick the path of least resistance more often than not. Furthermore, the dev team doesn't want us trying to ignore dungeons or raids we dislike. That's why they have never introduced a veto type system despite people asking. They want us filling queues for people.

If an ilvl requirement were set, it's impossible to be undergeared for the raids. If you weren't able to access Alliance Roulette once you hit 70 unless you unlocked Orbonne, the lowest you could be is i365. That's perfectly fine for said raid.

They want us filling queues for people, right. That's why I'm suggesting an opt out option. I don't fill queues for anyone waiting for alliance raids because I'd rather avoid the entire rouluette than get the really boring duties in it. If I could queue without being eligible for the raids I don't like, I would. It's a gain for everyone. Choice doesn't defeat the purpose of the roulette and if you think about it, we already have a choice in that we have multiple roulettes for filling different content. Every roulette except the Mentor roulette excludes duties. I'm just suggesting a slightly finer level of control. I feel like it's especially likely to work in the alliance roulette because we have a split of opinion on which raids are preferred. ARR is probably going to remain more popular overall no matter what is done, but if people who avoid the roulette entirely start queuing, that's a plus. More choice also means the people unwilling to deal with the 70 raids wouldn't be joining them and immediately quitting.

As for the ilvl requirement, I guess there are a few ways to implement it. As it is now it allows people to influence the raid that they get. If we change it so that the requirement is dynamic, people can still quit, some might just avoid unlocking certain raids. Those players like myself have no more incentive than now to queue, and new players (especially with Road to 70) might be cutoff from a roulette just because they don't meet the requirements for 1 duty within it.

I don't mind running the ARR raids so long as the dice everyone is using are legitimate. The raids already have a minimum ilv requirement, so you don't have to worry much about undergeared players in the higher level raids. Right now getting anything other a CT raid (more specifically LoTA and ST) is atrociously rare. It makes me wonder exactly how long this exploit has been going on.

There's definitely a spectrum of opinions regarding the roulette's content. Not everyone is completely tired of the level 50's, but I'd gladly wipe to Thunder God repeatedly instead of dealing with the total boredom of a LoTA/ST run.

The undergearing issue could be fixed by forcing your ilvl to match your character level or scale to the highest level raid you've unlocked, but like I mentioned above that doesn't solve all the problems. It's pretty easy to reach 70 before getting to MSQ level 70, so new players might be inadvertently locked out of Alliance roulette. Players reaching current expansion content also have to contend with increasing their ilvl and they may be excluded from the roulette during that process. The people already willing to quit a duty they don't like will still be willing to quit. I guess since I don't queue for alliance I don't really know how common that is, but it happens enough that it's been brought up in this discussion.

I just want to promote the idea of opting out from certain duties because I think it can be done while keeping the roulette as a means to fill queues. SE is in a better position than me to know if it will work or not as they can monitor duty activity, but at least on paper, I can see the narrowing of roulette choice increasing player participation.

[ForteNightshade]

They want us filling queues for people, right. That's why I'm suggesting an opt out option. I don't fill queues for anyone waiting for alliance raids because I'd rather avoid the entire rouluette than get the really boring duties in it. If I could queue without being eligible for the raids I don't like, I would. It's a gain for everyone. Choice doesn't defeat the purpose of the roulette and if you think about it, we already have a choice in that we have multiple roulettes for filling different content. Every roulette except the Mentor roulette excludes duties. I'm just suggesting a slightly finer level of control. I feel like it's especially likely to work in the alliance roulette because we have a split of opinion on which raids are preferred. ARR is probably going to remain more popular overall no matter what is done, but if people who avoid the roulette entirely start queuing, that's a plus. More choice also means the people unwilling to deal with the 70 raids wouldn't be joining them and immediately quitting.

As for the ilvl requirement, I guess there are a few ways to implement it. As it is now it allows people to influence the raid that they get. If we change it so that the requirement is dynamic, people can still quit, some might just avoid unlocking certain raids. Those players like myself have no more incentive than now to queue, and new players (especially with Road to 70) might be cutoff from a roulette just because they don't meet the requirements for 1 duty within it.

The problem is if you provide people an opt out method, a significant number will veto the least efficient options. In essence, you're providing a non-exploitative way for people to guarantee they only get LotA/ST which will make the queues even longer for everything else. If such a feature existed for say, Leveling Roulette, a lot of people will pick the baby dungeons to ensure they never take them. This could make queuing into even Copperbell a nightmare for newer players, which is not a good first impression. What you're suggesting wouldn't solve anything but potentially make it worse.