Stop capping other peoples chests based on completion status! (Savage)

[Colt47]

Why? I'm just really curious why this has to be done when the content is already hard enough to force people to spend tons of hours grinding away, losing resources, and dealing with all the social issues involved with savage raiding.

Why should someone who is completing a later savage get marked as being unable to get chests from prior stages, and then be forced to drop the number of chests for everyone else in the group? This means that players who do not participate on the Tuesday of reset are never going to get a chest, because those who have done a later stage on Tuesday, but haven't gotten a book from an earlier stage, will now join groups from earlier stages and drop their max loot.

No offense, but this makes doing savage a worthless piece of crap. You're clearing it for the loot drops and the possible mount at the end of it. This system negates 90% of the reason someone even does the content. The first freaking savage run is just the jewelry and belt.

"Because it will force people to go back and complete the first stages..." = Yeah... on Tuesday reset IF they feel like it. They probably will go do whatever they are progging on and forget about the earlier stuff.

[Seraphor]

It's to stop people being carried further than they should be. You could join a party as the only one who hasn't cleared it, then you'd be guaranteed both coffers at the end.
So it does make sense to limit the chests based on how many people have completed it. It's not perfect, but it does it's job.

One improvement could be that each person in the instance who has not yet completed it, adds a 25% chance of a coffer dropping at the end, which would mean 4 would grant a 100% chance of one coffer, and 8 would mean 200% chance, so 2 guaranteed coffers, which is the same as what we have, but would also allow for a chance of more coffers dropping for 1-3 and 5-7 new players.

It doesn't however make sense to lock people out of early fights when completing later ones, e.g. being loot-locked out of E5S when you only complete E6S. This only seems to exist in order to preserve the sense of progression, to make them a sequence of fights instead of just four disjointed instances.

[Crushnight]

Simple answer : To discourage win trading and to show difficulty curve.

Long answer: To prevent people from getting everything they want early with no consequence. If you could freely do all fights in any order without fear of losing chests people would jump to the last fight which holds the weapons/chest pieces.

Before you counter with just randomise where they are then you have people wanting the fight with their stuff 1st and if it is on an easier one like E5s compared to E8s it would cause nightmare fight balance issues as everything would need to be tuned to the higher end to prevent a lot more people having weapons week 1, just compare E5s clear numbers vs E8s clear numbers.

The devs have a clear you are expected to be able to handle E5s-E7s and have some gear from them to be clearing E8s. Pugs would jump to E8s 1st if they were not going to lose out on chests, they would be very unprepared for such a fight heck with the current system getting a pug clear of E8s is a dang nightmare (I've been trying for nearly 2 weeks with pugs and am now trying out a static, many a time could've killed but someone always dies costing the clear then group disbanded due to fatigue or frustration), having large groups of pugs with even less gear than now, no thanks the system can remain as is and I do not want savage tuned further down than it has been already if you are not prepared for what it asks of you, you don't deserve the gear, nor do you need it.

[Colt47]

It's to stop people being carried further than they should be. You could join a party as the only one who hasn't cleared it, then you'd be guaranteed both coffers at the end.
So it does make sense to limit the chests based on how many people have completed it. It's not perfect, but it does it's job.

One improvement could be that each person in the instance who has not yet completed it, adds a 25% chance of a coffer dropping at the end, which would mean 4 would grant a 100% chance of one coffer, and 8 would mean 200% chance, so 2 guaranteed coffers, which is the same as what we have, but would also allow for a chance of more coffers dropping for 1-3 and 5-7 new players.

It doesn't however make sense to lock people out of early fights when completing later ones, e.g. being loot-locked out of E5S when you only complete E6S. This only seems to exist in order to preserve the sense of progression, to make them a sequence of fights instead of just four disjointed instances.

The core of the problem is definitely the lockout caused from doing later fights. This feels like the devs wanted to simulate a mega dungeon like WoW Classic Molten Core, but kept it as a bunch of individual instances. It's just really clunky and doesn't fit this game system.

[DrWho2010]

well obviously it's worked and fits because they've done this ever since Heavensward.