Party finder ilevel restrictions

[Joeymtl]

While I agree that skills are more important than gear, that some requirements are way overkill for the content, and that I also find that the more important pieces like body and legs should be worth more in the average balance of the ilvl, I don't see why anyone would want to have less freedom to chose who they want in their party.

If the party leaders who set those high requirements can't find people in reasonable time, they will lower the requirements, the market law appplies there too. If they find people, we can't really complain, they make parties for their needs, not ours. And if he's here to get carried, leave his party.

[Mags]

It's their party, it's their rules for joining really. I understand they may be aiming to overshoot the content, or even ensure players have the metal to meet the challenge of the content they are seeking. But none the less that's how they want to do it. Nothing wrong with it if people are willing and are able to meet the demands they have set.

[Arkista]

There's been a couple people on my server who is putting CT ilvl up pass ilvl78.

[Empressia]

sure OP have fun joining titan hm in party finder with ilvl requirements of sub 60, theres nothing better than carrying those newbies who doesn't have a clue of how the fight goin on amirite?

[Jubez187]

Lodestone GD 101: Lesson - Hypocrisy

> "This game is an easy joke, stupid hotbar MMO, worse battle system than 2010 WoW clones."
-Random Guy

> Sick of unskilled scrubs trying to get me to carry them in EM Primals and Coil
-The Same Random Guy

[SarcasmMisser]

People can make whatever rules they want for their groups, if you don't like it join another or make your own. Be the change you want to see.

[Zfz]

Devs should update the party finder so either the party leader can't set an ilevel above their own

Definitely this. It makes perfect sense. :3

People can make whatever rules they want for their groups, if you don't like it join another or make your own. Be the change you want to see.

At the moment, the ilv requirement is a sort of "promise" that "if I join this, I'd be playing with people at least of this ilv". However, if the leader of the group is exempt from this requirement, then it breaks this promise that the system is making.

I see it as a dev oversight.

[Kadrothan]

On topic: I personally agree that the ilvl requirement set by the creator shouldn't exceed past his/her own average ilvl. It makes sense and would be fair to the people joining up said PF group.

Off topic on ilvl: My thoughts runs along the lines that content can certainly be completed at the minimum ilvl, but you have to be spot on to the T with all the mechanics. Very little, if any, room for error. The higher you shoot above the average ilvl, the greater the margin of error for most mechanics (notice I said most, and not all). i.e. Faster completion times for dps checks, greater capacity to soak up damage, healers can heal for more, etc. Asking for ilvl 78 in a minimum ilvl 50 is just asking for an easy run with 0 challenge.

[Dano]

its easy to bypass the ilvl check, just equip ilvl90 accessories (even if it's not for your class), join into the party, then switch back.

[SarcasmMisser]

At the moment, the ilv requirement is a sort of "promise" that "if I join this, I'd be playing with people at least of this ilv". However, if the leader of the group is exempt from this requirement, then it breaks this promise that the system is making.

I see it as a dev oversight.

its easy to bypass the ilvl check, just equip ilvl90 accessories (even if it's not for your class), join into the party, then switch back.

I agree with these two statements, the party leader shouldn't be exempt from the requirement. It's important to remember that accessories are a fraction of the upgrade an item on the left hand side is, so if someone has some i90 and most of it is on the right hand side it really isn't much different from full dl. I still prefer to inspect players rather than rely on a gear score; I want the full story