There needs to be a way to remove dungeons from roulette?

[Destati]

On the subject, I wouldn't be against having a single opt out dungeon, being able to choose just one dungeon you never want to play via a roulette.

I'd love to have something like this, actually. Everyone is likely to opt out of a different dungeon so I can't imagine it having a significant effect on queue times.

[Averax]

Can I remove a bullet from the Russian Roulette?

Yes, just don't tell people that you did.

All the fear... none of the risk.

[Awha]

Yes, just like the trials roulette is still a roulette despite not including Amaurot. Letting players avoid specific dungeons isn't going to cause the entire system to collapse. Participation may even increase if people didn't have to worry about being placed in their least favorite content. If certain dungeons are really despised by the majority, a separate option could be added to the duty finder to prioritize queuing into first timer dungeons or unpopular dungeons in return for more XP/tomes/whatever.

Isn't the point of the roulette to help people to fill up content that would normally not get people?

[RyuSaarva]

the entire point of roulettes is to help new players get duty pops.

[PyurBlue]

Isn't the point of the roulette to help people to fill up content that would normally not get people?

That is one of the intentions behind them but it is not an excuse to make roulettes frustrating or boring, especially when an opt out function isn't going to negatively impact queues. In fact we already have some ability to opt out of duties since we have multiple roulettes instead of one roulette covering all duties. The only roulette that is all encompassing in the mentor roulette, and it's one of the most complained about.

Giving players more control over what they queue for would almost certainly help the Alliance Raid roulette for example since there are players interested in the higher level raids as well as the lower levels ones. Players that refuse to queue because of the ARR raids might change their mind if they never have to play through them. More diverse roulettes like Leveling won't really suffer from the option to lock out a specific dungeon, or possibly a handful of them, because the list of duties is so long that no particular dungeon will be universally avoided. If that did end up happening somehow then incentives could be used to attract more players. Expert roulette is probably one of the few that might be an issue because it doesn't include many duties.

It sounds like a win win for me. Keep roulettes around to help queues and make them more fun for those participating in them.

[VenKitsune]

Honestly, I've seen more struggles with giant pulls when people forget they're synched down to i440 than with the actual bosses in there. (Though I have seen a breathtaking number of people accidentally dash/dive/backflip off the arena with the final boss.)

You could do boss room to boss room pulls during early access week wearing AF gear, so i dont know why it'd be a problem now. If people are dying to big pulls in amuarot, then its not the content's fault.

[Packetdancer]

When it comes to giant pulls, I found The Burn to be much more challenging. Because there are constantly aoes that you have to avoid. As long as Tanks watch their cds and Healers know what they are doing, I don't find it any more difficult than any other dungeon. But that's just my personal experience.

It's not so much that Amaurot is harder than a normal dungeon, in my experience, it's that the ilevel sync is aggressive enough that people who are coming in as level 80 used to the damage they can do and/or soak in later content with i470+ gear can be caught off-guard in Amaurot. Add to that the Roilers and Detonators that tether to folks (and the healing debuff you get from it), and some parties can get caught off-guard.

You're absolutely right that the Burn is more obnoxious, mechanically.

[ForteNightshade]

Yes, just like the trials roulette is still a roulette despite not including Amaurot. Letting players avoid specific dungeons isn't going to cause the entire system to collapse. Participation may even increase if people didn't have to worry about being placed in their least favorite content. If certain dungeons are really despised by the majority, a separate option could be added to the duty finder to prioritize queuing into first timer dungeons or unpopular dungeons in return for more XP/tomes/whatever.

It's far more likely queues would become unbearably longer for certain dungeons than increase. If you could veto five dungeons from Leveling, I can all but guarantee which ones would be picked.

Sastasha
Copper Bell
Toto-rak
Tam-tara
Aurum Vale

And therein lies the problem. Four of them are story required, which means new players could be waiting hours. Amaurot would have a similar problem simply because of the ilvl sync.

[technole]

You don't have to run a roulette, imagine that concept.

So many ways to get tomes in this game now.

[Mahoukenshi]

This. Amaurat especially needs rouletters to help new players finish the MSQ.
I would love to opt out of ARR content in my roulettes since I find most of it dull now but the reality is the roulettes primarily exist to keep old content alive and doing so would hurt queues.

Technically, MSQ players can run Amaurot just as the other msq dungeons with Trusts which makes the whole roulette reliance rather wonky, unless the players specifically prefer to run those dungeons with real people. This is, of course, fair enough, and up to everyone's personal preferenance. In contrast to pre-ShB dungeons where you must rely on other players - no negative connotation intended - to queue for the dungeons (and some "harder"/longer to queue trials).