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

[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?

[linay]

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?

Yes, but outside of you being bored of the content, you'll still get an appropriate reward for completing that low level roulette. Meanwhile, I've been in too many runs in the past where, after I've queued for a long time, only for a tank to quit right at the beginning and the party not being able to do the mechanics because of it, forcing a vote to abandon or mass people leaving.

Hence, if we want to force item level restriction, which I've agreed to, there has to be something else that goes along with it, either incentives for staying or punishments for leaving, or both. The only reason why I'm not as excited for more incentives is because I think alliance roulette is already worth it regardless of which duty I get, but that's just me.

[Alucard135]

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 that does not it not a problem?

It also takes one level 50-59 player to have 23 players do a level 50 content. In fact, I don't even remember one run I did without actually having players between these levels or a bonus, which in SE's mind the system is working as intended. And it actually had me lean more towards that these players are an insignificant number. If we reach a case where you are constantly getting max level players in level 50 dungeon, then we do have a problem and those cheesing the system are not a minority of players. So if they get forced into a roulettes, it only takes one to leave to have the others drop like flies because they won't get penalized.

...

Yes, that is another problem I've seen especially with Orbonne monastery. People keep spamming "vote abandon" after Cid and sometimes it passes after the first wipe. Wasting the entire time spent there for everyone.

[Calcilis]

So he block the user who was nicest to him in argument.

Figures

[RyuDragnier]

Yes, but outside of you being bored of the content, you'll still get an appropriate reward for completing that low level roulette. Meanwhile, I've been in too many runs in the past where, after I've queued for a long time, only for a tank to quit right at the beginning and the party not being able to do the mechanics because of it, forcing a vote to abandon or mass people leaving.

Hence, if we want to force item level restriction, which I've agreed to, there has to be something else that goes along with it, either incentives for staying or punishments for leaving, or both. The only reason why I'm not as excited for more incentives is because I think alliance roulette is already worth it regardless of which duty I get, but that's just me.

They might want to increase the penalty (only for leaving 24-mans mind you) to 1 hour then. That's 1 hour you can't do anything, and most 24-mans can be done in 45 minutes.

[linay]

They might want to increase the penalty (only for leaving 24-mans mind you) to 1 hour then. That's 1 hour you can't do anything, and most 24-mans can be done in 45 minutes.

Unfortunately, if you only penalize people for leaving, you'll get people who will act out to get kicked intentionally or fake a disconnect.

The sad truth is that people's abuse of a system will always necessitate inconveniences for legitimate use of the system.

[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.

[Reinha]

Imposing ilvl restriction will just make people that don't want higher level alliances to just drop when they get them.

People don't drop trial roulette just because they get Tsukuyomi instead of a quick one like Cape Westwind or Chimera. The small minority who would leave an alliance roulette are insignificant. It doesn't matter if they like to spend their play time being penalised because the group who wants to be in the raid will not even notice their absence while they clear trash and refill the group.

[SturmChurro]

People don't drop trial roulette just because they get Tsukuyomi instead of a quick one like Cape Westwind or Chimera. The small minority who would leave an alliance roulette are insignificant. It doesn't matter if they like to spend their play time being penalised because the group who wants to be in the raid will not even notice their absence while they clear trash and refill the group.

You say that, but there are many times when a healer drops and you NEVER get a replacement. Or multiple people drop and you never get replacements. This happens frequently (has happened). In Orbonne, people are prone to vote abandon if there is one wipe.

However, to the topic at hand, another solution could be like the 50/60/70 roulette. Make a lower tiered alliance raid roulette, and a higher tier alliance raid roulette.