(Aug 19 NZT) Hardcore No-Party Ladder Race

Here was my gear when I died lvl 20 waterfall cave level 1 at nearly the 2 hour mark.

See if you can guess why I died...

"

Zyx wrote:

But I figured you'd be above name-calling and showing off.

...

"

Septile wrote:

So what I can gather from the party-advocates is that they want another solo-only race to gather more evidence. I see no reason to argue against such a reasonable stance.

I dont see a problem with this, you are correct in this assumption. But as I mentioned a few pages back I wanted to wait until there were more events per week because I dont want to sacrifice the party race for it.

Also I noticed someone quoted both a question, and then answered it with my own explanation that was in the same post?!

"

sakuiliv wrote:

WHAT IS THIS SORCERY?!

Thats really funny man, I dont disagree, but I think people probably figured out the answer to that question by reading my post (no need to nitpick)

EDIT: Just to clarify what I was agreeing with, the point that performance in these races is largely a function of practice/testing.

"

Metronomy wrote:

"

Septile wrote:

So what I can gather from the party-advocates is that they want another solo-only race to gather more evidence. I see no reason to argue against such a reasonable stance.

I dont see a problem with this, you are correct in this assumption. But as I mentioned a few pages back I wanted to wait until there were more events per week because I dont want to sacrifice the party race for it.

The effect of having both events could easily end up being some players ending up only playing in one of those events and then we are back at the endless quarrel over solo versus team.

I think it is a good idea to have the two kinds of events at different weeks to have as many people participate in both as possible. I think the cutthroat events pander to another group of players!

Solo-races does give GGG a better feedback in terms of class-balance than team-races. Equal footing and all. I completely support these kinds of data-gathering events before 0.9.12 to get an idea about the low level balance. Sorry about the lack of events for teams, but for the time being I think it is a good choice to go for balance-data above all else.

I play these races for fun, not to provide GGG with data..., I think GGG want us to enjoy their game.(EDIT) Im just posting about what I found from the feedback/results of this race, I didnt think this was an argument.

"

radiatoren wrote:

The effect of having both events could easily end up being some players ending up only playing in one of those events and then we are back at the endless quarrel over solo versus team.

Quarrelling aside, how does this logic make any sense?

Having 2 events each weekend, 1 solo and 1 non-solo, either at the same time or different times, is going to be a positive thing for everyone.

You say 'back to the endless quarrel' like you're speaking in a past tense world where quarrelling isn't happening. Either way there is a good old quarrel.

Sorry I just couldn't make light of the logic of that particular statement. Not trying to participate in the quarrel.

I am all for 2 different races on weekends, for as long as they are not at the same time.
2 races means double the rewards :-D!

On a serious note: What exactly is the current argument about?

In a race with groups allowed everybody is free to find/create a group if he thinks that groups bring a benefit.

And if a race with groups allowed or disabled is better differs from player to player, so there is no point in arguing about that either.

"

Metronomy wrote:

Also I noticed someone quoted both a question, and then answered it with my own explanation that was in the same post?!

Yes, I did. You said no one can argue that half the classes in the solo race did better than any of those classes did in any of the party races. Then in another spoiler, said that people will practice more and get better... Well yes they will, and that's a significant reason why people outperformed those classes in the solo race. People practiced more and got better.

I don't think soloing is at a huge disadvantage currently, but if a party full of highly skilled people gets together and tweaks their strategies, I could see a 35% disparity in exp between that party's average exp and the average exp of the top solo-ers in each class. That seems like a problem to me. Mainly because I enjoy playing solo and I know others do as well.

The solution is to either run 2 simultaneous races, one party enabled and one party disabled, or have one race with two separate prize pools. The first option seems more feasible.

They could just run two separate races at different times, as Bummssacke would like, but this opens the door for soloers to complain again.

I DO NOT want them to nerf partying directly in any way, although portals could be tweaked. Perhaps if someone with a portal uses a portal their portal gets consumed? This would at least eliminate the "2 portals = infinite portals" problem.

"

TehHammer wrote:

They could just run two separate races at different times, as Bummssacke would like, but this opens the door for soloers to complain again.

If that happened, the only people that would complain would be the people that don't want their prizes cheapened by giving out more per week.

"

Bummssacke wrote:

I am all for 2 different races on weekends, for as long as they are not at the same time.
2 races means double the rewards :-D!

if they would be at the same time, the chance of getting rewards would even more increase for some people (with a very low chance otherwise...) ^^ I really doubt they double the rewards.

"

In a race with groups allowed everybody is free to find/create a group if he thinks that groups bring a benefit.

The argument is, that it needs a lot of coordination and practice to do well in a group - especially if you're not very experienced with this. And you will need a solution to communicate along the race if you're not a really well-experienced team (or have at least a very good leader that the others "simply" have to follow...) Summary: for the biggest part of the players, thats nothing to organize within the small timespan between char creation and race start.

And the benefit is, that with a group you can minimize the influence of bad luck by a notable percentage (of course only if everybody know what to do). The difference in progress between lucky and unlucky rolls (maps, drops) on a solo char is much higher - at least if you care a bit about staying alive, and dont take every risk to proceed.

"

And if a race with groups allowed or disabled is better differs from player to player, so there is no point in arguing about that either.

Its simply not comparable, and thats why I'm pro-split.

"

TehHammer wrote:

The solution is to either run 2 simultaneous races, one party enabled and one party disabled, or have one race with two separate prize pools. The first option seems more feasible.

Would be very interesting to see how it splits if they would make a test with both races simultaneous - when every participant has to decide which route to go ^^

If its possible to safe detect if a char didnt party up while a race runs, separating the rewards would be the best way to go (IMHO): it would avoid splitting up the players base.

"

TehHammer wrote:

They could just run two separate races at different times, as Bummssacke would like, but this opens the door for soloers to complain again.

if they only complain about being "invaded" by soloing party-pro's - and thats the only possible complain I can see from that suggestion - thats not valid. If others are better, even without their party, then thats life (in Wraeclast) ^^

"

TehHammer wrote:

Perhaps if someone with a portal uses a portal their portal gets consumed? This would at least eliminate the "2 portals = infinite portals" problem.

I dont expect this as a possible solution, and I dont see any other viable solution about the behaviour of portals in a party right now. Maybe, to limit the amount of portals to one area from one group to one? Have to think about possible consequences...