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

[Alucard135]

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.

[LeoLupinos]

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.

[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.

[LeoLupinos]

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?

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.

[Theodric]

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.

[LeoLupinos]

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.

[LauraAdalena]

Perhaps better incentives should be added to encourage participation in content that takes longer and requires more effort. A lot of people play after a long day working and/or studying and so the path of least resistance is no doubt tempting for many of those individuals. I'm all for adjustments being made, though a lot of people will probably just quit and eat the thirty minute penalty if they get something they're not in the mood for. Much like what happens with certain duties in the Mentor roulette.

What sort of incentives do you propose to go along with your suggestion if it were implemented?

So, might I throw my hat into the ring here?

I know when I get home from work I actually want to play a game and not just run tediousness. So I know I’m probably a minority but I’d rather get like Dun Scaith or Orbonne. Anyway, I know that’s not really a solution or opinion but more my perspective so my answers don’t sound as outlandish, hopefully.

The thing I disagree with the post is that it shouldn’t be the max ilvl you qualify for, that creates an Expert roulette thing where they lock you out until you have all the duties and those aren’t fun. I prefer the roulettes that are more flexible. What they should do however is limit it to the ones you’ve unlocked.

Now, as for the 30 minute lockout what I was curious to know was if they should put stricter or different lockout requirements on 24-man content. Since 1. It’s far longer than most content when it’s on content. 2. Currently if one person leaves everyone can leave for free regardless. Which, that’s fine on a 4 man and in some cases 8 man content but 24 man that sounds ridiculous. What I think they should do is regardless of which one it is make it so the lockout for leaving is longer than 30 minutes if you just started or haven’t reached X point in the raid, at which point it reduces to normal. (Or even make all lockouts work that way where they slowly get looser over time). Im not saying that would work or even that it’s practical. In fact this is probably a concept that sounds good on paper but horrible in execution.

Something inspired by the accursed hoard that can be found in POTD/HOH. etc. etc.

I like the idea of this. But knowing how they dealt with the Irregular Tomestones they’d just put it as the main reward of the roulette and/or on the ARR ones defeating the purpose. All because “people who don’t have expansion should get to do this.” Which I guess is okay for the tomestones but like, can’t we do a thing where like the HW and SB ones give more to promote people to actually do that content over the ones that are already spammed? Anyway, another way they could do it is Double or triple the clusters you get. Maybe.

[linay]

Currently if one person leaves everyone can leave for free regardless.

Is that so? I've asked others about this in the past, and the answer I've gotten has always been that it's limited to your own alliance. Someone from another alliance leaving first would still penalize the first person in your alliance who leaves afterward, but I've never tested it myself.

[Alucard135]

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.

[LeoLupinos]

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.

Minority does not mean that they are not relevant. I don't understand your comparison, since I've explained why they are a problem.
It all only requires ONE person lowering the ilvl to for 23 players to do Lvl 50 content. How does is that not a problem?