Please fix the “naked queueing” for Aliance Raids

[Saraide]

I guess you've only been playing 2-3 months. I've been playing since beta and when there isn't a flood of new players, it's quite normal to get CT every day of the week with no "new player" bonus.

Also, I know how the queue works because I have the powers of observation and have thoroughly and extensively tested queue weighting to get people through content who have sat in a partial queue waiting hours for it to fill.

All it takes is to understand which roles are likely to queue a generic roulette and then to assume the roles that fill.

I've been playing for 1 and half years now so I'm glad for any experiences before that especially. In any case I am very much for solving the cause instead of the symptoms and the cause is that later alliance raids are much worse in terms of time vs reward. I've said it earlier in this thread already, essentially making all alliance raids mandatory could just drive massive amounts of people away from alliance roulette, which wouldnt help queues on non CT-raids but would also make CT queues worse. There needs to be a careful balance for time vs reward in the roulette so that people dont care about which alliance raid they get (and dont just flip towards the opposite of abandoning CT raids on sight). I genuinely do not believe it has anything to do with difficulty because to this day we have wipes in WoD.

[Boldprint]

it doesn't matter either way, if you get ride of naked queing then people will just que in ironwork's gear and will still be the same result.

[Ardeth]

it doesn't matter either way, if you get ride of naked queing then people will just que in ironwork's gear and will still be the same result.

Bingo. It's a problem when for easier and faster work I get paid the same. So why would I queue into a gamble? I can control the outcome by removing gear.

The only way around it I can think of is giving the level an average item level. Like a level 90 has to queue with an average item level of like 530 let's say. Not something super high, but not them queuing in at item level 90. So they have to sweep across the whole breath of the content available to them.

But even that has a flaw. I'll just queue with level 50s and the problem persists.

They really shit the bed in the long run with roulettes like this one.

[UkcsAlias]

Then you would need to unlock those other raids to queue into the roulette again otherwise no alliance roulette till you do.

You reach max level of whatever DLC you have before unlocking those raids. Note that im level 76 and still in HW. This means that you cannot queue at all then (which is a garbage system because you would exclude a massive numbers of players then. players that would be very helpful), unless you level a lot of classes and never exceed the MSQ level. I think you forgot how quickly you level in the MSQ.

I would at least consider the MSQ level as a solid cap to decide which DLC raids you can get put into:
If you are MSQ level 60, you simply can be put into all 60 raids, and the ilvl requirement matches the highest lvl 60 raid. Upon reaching the next DLC, it still keeps this 60 requirement, until you completed it (MSQ lvl 70). And then it updates the ilvl requirement to lvl 70 for any character that is above lvl 70. Classes below will take the treshold of whatever level suits them. At level 59, it still takes lvl 50, but as soon as its 60, it updates. if you queued at level 59 and leveled up during the queue, you obviously stay in the 50 pool. This way you cannot prevent the higher raids using the ilvl exploit, while still being graceful to enable any lvl 50+ class from joining.

[SeverianLyonesse]

it doesn't matter either way, if you get ride of naked queing then people will just que in ironwork's gear and will still be the same result.

I think it's implied they want to ban undergeared queuing as well. At least that's how I interpreted it.

I think, at least as far as roulettes go, players should be required to have a certain iLevel proportionate to the job's level. Or, if we want to simplify even further, just set the ilevel barriers in tiers spaced every ten levels:

* Level 50-59 needs to be ilevel 50 or higher.
* Level 60-69 needs to be ilevel 150 or higher.
* Level 70-79 needs to be ilevel 290 or higher.
* Level 80-89 needs to be ilevel 430 or higher.
* Level 90 has no limit because it is current tier, would need 570 or higher in 7.0.

Bingo. It's a problem when for easier and faster work I get paid the same. So why would I queue into a gamble? I can control the outcome by removing gear.

Except you're not really working or being paid; you're engaging in a leisure activity with absolutely no real-world payout no matter how fast or long you grind.

We are playing a game that we are supposed to be having fun with, and moreover one that we are supposed to be enjoying with other players. In fact, one that by design we *have* to enjoy with other players most instances. Sure, if by consensus your group wants to grind quickly that's fine, but taking this attitude that one should be entitled to exploit systems that affect others' ability to enjoy the game is where I draw the line at crummy.

Yes, the system is flawed and needs to be fixed. But it's not really fair to offload all the blame onto it when a subsection of the community just aren't very principled and bring down the community with these incredibly myopic, selfish justifications. Just because the convenience store's security has flaws doesn't mean I should feel comfortable stealing a bag of chips every day because it optimizes my budget.

Laws and rules can only do so much; the rest of a community's health depends on how much its members actually consider the effects of their actions. Yeah, I don't expect everyone to be perfect, but there is a difference between having the empathy and honesty to acknowledge where one is cutting corners at the expense of others, versus trying to evade accountability altogether.

[Plastics]

Nah, it's fine. If you want people to do the other alliance raids, maybe they should have significantly higher rewards.

[RyuDragnier]

Nah, it's fine. If you want people to do the other alliance raids, maybe they should have significantly higher rewards.

Or people can stop being cowards and actually do the other alliance raids. Complaining they want a challenge then balk and run the second a higher level alliance raid comes in.

[Imora]

@Baxel, I think not. I LIKE crystal tower. You want to run something else, then queue specific. YOU don't get the roulette. *I* am fine with it.

I didn't have any interest in any of the others and only begrudgingly did copied factory for the materiel crate.

Why should I be forced to do content I don't want because you're stuck doing content you don't want?

[Imora]

Ryu, I never said I wanted a challenge. The mechanics aren't a challenge, getting 23 other people to do them properly is. I don't have time for that, I've wasted enough time in WOW's LFR.

I want in, done, out.

And no, I don't naked queue. I just don't have anything unlocked. I refused to do lighthouse after my Rabanastre run took almost the entire timer so I never even started my relic in ShB.

I played void ark when it was current and it was a wipe festival then too.

If Im going to wipe repeatedly on content it's going to be with a static and not randos.

[Ardeth]

I think it's implied they want to ban undergeared queuing as well. At least that's how I interpreted it.

I think, at least as far as roulettes go, players should be required to have a certain iLevel proportionate to the job's level. Or, if we want to simplify even further, just set the ilevel barriers in tiers spaced every ten levels:

* Level 50-59 needs to be ilevel 50 or higher.
* Level 60-69 needs to be ilevel 150 or higher.
* Level 70-79 needs to be ilevel 290 or higher.
* Level 80-89 needs to be ilevel 430 or higher.
* Level 90 has no limit because it is current tier, would need 570 or higher in 7.0.



Except you're not really working or being paid; you're engaging in a leisure activity with absolutely no real-world payout no matter how fast or long you grind.

We are playing a game that we are supposed to be having fun with, and moreover one that we are supposed to be enjoying with other players. In fact, one that by design we *have* to enjoy with other players most instances. Sure, if by consensus your group wants to grind quickly that's fine, but taking this attitude that one should be entitled to exploit systems that affect others' ability to enjoy the game is where I draw the line at crummy.

Yes, the system is flawed and needs to be fixed. But it's not really fair to offload all the blame onto it when a subsection of the community just aren't very principled and bring down the community with these incredibly myopic, selfish justifications. Just because the convenience store's security has flaws doesn't mean I should feel comfortable stealing a bag of chips every day because it optimizes my budget.

Laws and rules can only do so much; the rest of a community's health depends on how much its members actually consider the effects of their actions. Yeah, I don't expect everyone to be perfect, but there is a difference between having the empathy and honesty to acknowledge where one is cutting corners at the expense of others, versus trying to evade accountability altogether.

At the end of the day you want tomes. And if I can get them in half the time with next to no work I'm going to do it. Sure I'd rather get more xp if I'm leveling, but even then I'd rather hedge the safe bet. It's not up to me to come up with a solution. It's the corporation we pay our subscriptions to.