Instanced Raids Unveiled!

[Nero]

Bay, this doesn't make any sense. You can't have a difficult raid if you can take classes in that are 20 levels over the intended design of the area. It can't work. If the one word is difficult, then by default it isn't even a rank 30 dungeon. It's a rank 50 dungeon you would be crazy to take R30s into.

Otherwise, the one word is not difficult.

Learn to Read. Noone said that the Rank of the Mob wont change if you enter a R25 Dungeon, with a R50 Class.

[Sigmakan]

Spoke with the dev. team to get some answers on a few of the questions that have been popping up in the thread.

Are there level restrictions for instanced raids?
There is a minimum level required to enter, but not a maximum level. Therefore, if it’s a level 25 raid, as long as you are 25 or above you will be able to enter.

How often can you enter an instanced raid?
After entering once, you will need to wait a period of time before you can re-enter. (The time has yet to be finalized)

Can you gain SP while battling in raids?
Yes.

What happens if you disconnect while in the instanced raid?
You'll be able to reconnect and rejoin your party. If the party has exited by the time you return, you will be placed outside of the dungeon.

Are four players required to enter rank 25+ raids? And 8 for 45+?
Currently, yes. Rank 25+ raids will require four players to enter, and rank 45+ raids will require a full party of 8. This is a result of the balancing that is done inside of the actual raid, along with ensuring proper load on the servers are maintained. With the release of patch 1.18 we will monitor the comments and feedback from the community and re-evaluate as necessary and implement variations as needed.

But... are these raids gonna be tough? I want a challenge! I CRAVE A CHALLENGE!!!1
Rest assured... When speaking about the current raid dungeons, we can sum it up in one word: difficult.

Both bold items are terrible decisions. Why make a minimum member requirement? The difficulty of the dungeon should determine how many members are needed, not some random minimum req. With populations dwindling, having 8 people is a lot harder than you think.

I'm all for designing it based on the assumption of 4/8 party sizes, but limiting parties to that is a bad decision.

[Peregrine]

Both bold items are terrible decisions. Why make a minimum member requirement? The difficulty of the dungeon should determine how many members are needed, not some random minimum req. With populations dwindling, having 8 people is a lot harder than you think.

I'm all for designing it based on the assumption of 4/8 party sizes, but limiting parties to that is a bad decision.

Lowmanning is a mechanism to feed as few mouths as possible and has come to be synonymous with elitism and exclusion. I like that you have to have 8 members.

Some of the elitist shells are so unpopular that they can't even fill the 8 man roster without boxing because no one can stand them. And they like it that way because they don' thave to pay anyone but as few people as possible.

When you choose to get more gear for you than to hang around more peers, that's counter-MMO.

[Sigmakan]

Lowmanning is a mechanism to feed as few mouths as possible and has come to be synonymous with elitism and exclusion. I like that you have to have 8 members.

Some of the elitist shells are so unpopular that they can't even fill the 8 man roster without boxing because no one can stand them.

I understand that concern. But elitist shells are going to be elitist shells regardless. Forcing them to take 8 wont solve that to be honest. All it does is hurt LSs who have seen LS numbers dwindle and have trouble summoning 8 members reliably.

[Peregrine]

I understand that concern. But elitist shells are going to be elitist shells regardless. Forcing them to take 8 wont solve that to be honest. All it does is hurt LSs who have seen LS numbers dwindle and have trouble summoning 8 members reliably.

If you unlock it, R50s will solo the R30 instances. Can't happen from a server resource standpoint.
If you unlock R50 raids, people will not invite you to run with them. If they need more people to go, they'll be actively looking to complete the party.

The server would be much more inclusive. Hey we need you, come along. Rather than no gimp. You're just another mouth we don't need.

Your small shell would have a better time I think this way. Picking up new friends to fill your parties out, and in the process getting new shellmates.

It's good.

[TheVedis]

If you unlock it, R50s will solo the R30 instances. Can't happen from a server resource standpoint.
If you unlock R50 raids, people will not invite you to run with them. If they need more people to go, they'll be actively looking to complete the party.

The server would be much more inclusive. Hey we need you, come along. Rather than no gimp. You're just another mouth we don't need.

Your small shell would have a better time I think this way. Picking up new friends to fill your parties out, and in the process getting new shellmates.

It's good.

r50s cant solo the r30 dungeon anyway

so your arguement is moot right then and there

[Peregrine]

r50s cant solo the r30 dungeon anyway

so your arguement is moot right then and there

I could solo the R30 NMs if they unlocked the player requirements, so your input is irrelevant. I can destroy a party of rank 30's as a rank 50.
So yeah. I'd be soloing the R30 dungeon. Maybe you wouldn't on whatever caliber of conjurer or thaumaturge you have.

I'm not you. Pretty obvious.

[Sigmakan]

If you unlock it, R50s will solo the R30 instances. Can't happen from a server resource standpoint.
If you unlock R50 raids, people will not invite you to run with them. If they need more people to go, they'll be actively looking to complete the party.

The server would be much more inclusive. Hey we need you, come along. Rather than no gimp. You're just another mouth we don't need.

Your small shell would have a better time I think this way. Picking up new friends to fill your parties out, and in the process getting new shellmates.

It's good.

Its possible we'll get more shellmates, we'll see.

However, in regards to your first point. That would be solved if there was a level cap for R30s.

[Peregrine]

Its possible we'll get more shellmates, we'll see.

However, in regards to your first point. That would be solved if there was a level cap for R30s.

Yup, but too late for that now.

[Xenor]

I understand that concern. But elitist shells are going to be elitist shells regardless. Forcing them to take 8 wont solve that to be honest. All it does is hurt LSs who have seen LS numbers dwindle and have trouble summoning 8 members reliably.

I'm more concerned about the number of people that will be excluded from the content due to the low party size limit. Currently when my LS runs NMs we can have anywhere from 8 to 24 people come for the event. If 14 turn up we do two groups of 7. With these raids and the 8 player requirement you've then got six people sitting picking their noses while the other 8 have fun.

Of course you can "exploit" that requirement by bringing along filler mules which I'm sure will happen and I'd have no problem doing if it gets me to play the game rather than sit doing nothing.