SHIELD Dwarf Runs through Moria Q&A - Notes on What Was Said

[Beaniemooch]

I don't understand why everyone feels such a strong need to foreclose on the issue...

Because for most who have held out hope there's no other way to look at it. I understand raiders are a low percentage of the population and it's high cost content. I still believe it adds value to the game for more than just the >10% crowd. I also believe it is a self-fulfilling prophesy of fewer people run raid/instance content because it hasn't been released with HD (Erebor was very disappointing), and without new traditional content there will be many who never experience it at all in lotro. There will be others who leave because of its lack, or come back for brief moments rather than months. To me it's rather a sad statement. I didn't say it was new, but when people see words like "near future" and "foreseeable future" it leaves hope for the "later future". Give a man hope and he hangs onto that, regardless of if it's reasonable. I think for a lot of folks this popped the last hope bubble they had.

Many foreclose because at some point they need closure.

[welden]

First let me state that I have no intimate knowledge of Turbine, nor its staff, its resources or their current state of affairs as far as Lotro is concerned. I have only these forums and what I have gleaned from the comments made by Sapience and others from Turbine.

I surmise the following: (which no Turbine dev or community coordinator is likely to confirm or deny)

The Lotro player base has fallen from their previous highs...

The sales of the last expansion (Helm's Deep) preformed lower than projected...

Lower sales translated into reduced revenue which has no doubt lowered Lotro's support and developement budgets...which ultimately lead to the lay-offs earlier this year.

This has led to the cancelation of most if not all marginal and poor revenue producing content, i.e., raids and instanced clusters!

I also believe that EB content from Helm's Deep has under preformed as well. However, is seems that Turbine is still riding 'the intial investment wave' of this content and associated tech to hopefully recoup as much as possible as further tweaking of this tech in upcoming updates rolls out later this year.

It is too bad for those whose primary interest in Lotro centered around the further developed of these raids and instances!

It is however, interesting to learn that raids and instances were only being supported by a larger player base that in reality paid them little or no attention and when the numbers of that base began to drop it is no wonder that Turbine would be forced to put that type of content on indefinite hold.

My two or three cents...

Welden

[frickinmuck]

Just wanted to remind everyone of the community guidelines, and of the real purpose of this thread. Perhaps this is an issue best tabled for now, or moved elsewhere.

[Herwegur]

The sales of the last expansion (Helm's Deep) preformed lower than projected...

Which, interestingly enough, contained no new instances/raids and attempted to replace them altogether by introducing a new (and, judging by poor sales) unpopular system. The resultant drop in player population speaks for itself.

For the record: I am not a "raider". I am a casual soloer with an XP-disabler on, and my main is still very far from cap after two years of active playing. I'm the weirdo you might see /walking (not running) through landscape and roleplaying/emoting with NPCs. However, I have discovered the joy of participating in instances and raids on level. I find it fun not only for the challenging and strategic gameplay and class dynamics it offers, but also for the pure narrative thrill of taking my character to an epic group fight. This, too, is immersion for me.

I am not a min/maxer obsessing over gear and stats. I am not "elite" by any means nor do I pretend to be. I am not a raider. I am simply a player who enjoys a good story, and I enjoy raids and instances because pushing my character to its limits in strategic and involved group-centered gameplay puts me even deeper into a good story. Ans yes, all my raid/instance experiences have been in PUGs. Some good, some bad, some strange. But that's the exciting part: every experience is different.

So what player demographic do I fit? Would I be counted as a casual soloer, and thus used in argument against adding group content? Or would I be counted as a "single-digit user" of raids/instances and thus dismissed as a mere "minority" whose opinions are not representative, despite also being a casual Middle-Earth-tourist and thus the chief target demographic of the game's presumed current focus?

[Gedachtnis]

Just wanted to remind everyone of the community guidelines, and of the real purpose of this thread. Perhaps this is an issue best tabled for now, or moved elsewhere.

Umm, people are generally being respectful, Turbine has said they want to be more open and communicative, why would you attempt to stop people from posting about a topic that was covered in the SHIELD runs? Are you saying we shouldn't ask for clarification of the foreseeable future because you don't care what the answer is?

If we aren't supposed to read meanings into things then when clarification is asked for it shouldn't be a big deal to actually clarify.

Cirith Ungol, the Guard Tower, Minas Morgul, the caves around the Black Gate, are any of these areas in the planning stages or considered the foreseeable future? I mean honestly, it's a pretty simple question.

[Lunasa]

During Build 1, the total number of players going through the Paths of the Dead was 579, and the total number of players hitting Level 100 was 469.

These number come from the server-wide numbers needed to unlock quests in the Paths of the Dead and the Caves of Emyn Enril.
They are displayed on the Banners in Dol Amroth. The numbers are from Tuesday 17 June at 1pm shortly before BR was shutdown.

The numbers on the banners did not represent the number of players directly. I handed in those quests 30 times (with my 4 lvl100 characters) so I am responsible for at least 30 counts in 469 (in fact 20 on that banner and 10 on the other banner). I know at least 5 other players who each handed in tokens more than 20 times and I believe there were many more of those. Just like I know a number of players who reached lvl100 and never touched the dailies in Dol Amroth during the first round.


As for the player population on the Bullroarer server I usually look at the number of players on the social panel sorting them by level or by class. During the SHIELD event on Bullroarer I saw about 150 non-anonymous players - not nearly as much as I expected.

[Runesi_EU]

In fact, as he just pointed out, if the level of interest in raids changes, then they would of course look at making an investment in what players want.

It will never change whilst there is no new instance cluster to reignite peoples interest, those that were only interested in doing the current end game instance clusters each time they are released have probably left already. I don't see how, without a new instance clusters, interest in running this type of content will ever increase. I guess then that the logical conclusion from this is that with player interest in this type of content continuing to get smaller (because of a lack of any new content) that this type of traditional raid content will continue to remain off the cards.

Fortunately I imagine 100% of players have gained at least one level so we can continue to expect level cap increases as gaining levels appears to be quite popular.

[Radbug]

How data is interpreted is absolutely critical.

I've been saying this for years.

Data is only as good as the analysis performed upon it. I have no doubt that Turbine have masses of data - my doubts lay elsewhere...

[q945]

Ah, but Sapience said they had statistics for the last 8 years (we are pushing into the 8th year of LOTRO). If the statistics over those 8 years shows that the interest isn't high enough to realistically keep supporting that kind of content on a regular basis, then I think the raiders (and other end-game groupers) have pretty much missed the boat. I sympathize, as I thoroughly enjoy a proper raid (much better than I'll probably ever enjoy the EBs), but that's the downside of being a minority. Turbine is faced with either A: Keep giving us large group content clusters on a regular basis, hoping more people will be drawn in, and spending a lot of time and money doing so, or B: Recognize that it simply is not making a big enough return on their investment. So yes, it will be hard for the groupers, because their options are limited. But hardly a self-fulfilling prophecy. There simply isn't enough of us for Turbine to justify the time and money spent. Now, I can't say how we would go about turning the situation around, but I would much rather have this result. If the return (monetary if nothing else) isn't enough to compensate for the time/costs of developing raids, then how long do you think LOTRO would have survived with the continuing support of that content? If cutting back on low-return content means LOTRO can live to fight another day, then I'm satisfied. Better a game without raids than no game at all.

At least, that's the way I read and understood it to mean. *shrug*

If they had data for 8 years and it was constant over that period why stop making them only now?

Also just looking at usage data ignores two important factors: Halo Effect and Critical Mass.

Halo Effect; Lots of players see raiders walking around with nice gear but are unable to raid much themselves, but the longing to be part of that scene keeps them hanging around, even if they aren't actively raiding 5/6 days a week.

Critical Mass: Once the raiders leave and your server is no longer full of "glff: LFF Sambrog 5/6 speed runs", etc it no longer looks like the happening place to be and people will drift off to other games. Its especially cringeworthy when you see people trying for 30 mins or more to find enough people on the whole server for a 3-man.

[pittcrew1]

Just wanted to remind everyone of the community guidelines, and of the real purpose of this thread. Perhaps this is an issue best tabled for now, or moved elsewhere.

I imagine you are refering to:
6. Derailing/disruption of official discussion threads.
Official threads are created by the Community, Development, and other teams to gather feedback and create a focused discussion around a given topic. Attempting to derail these threads by posting unrelated comments or bringing other issues into the discussion is not permitted.

I can tell this starting to shift focus (well, it was a while ago). At the same time, these questions never seem to get answered. That said, it isn't necessary to clog an official thread, so you have a point, but we just want some explanation as to how they get/use the data so we can interpret it ourselves and either give up because Turbine was right, or try to explain why Turbine's interpretation is incorrect. Again, it's a lost cause; we give them enough information right now that they could use to sway their view on the data, and they don't use it or think its of value.

The point is, I think, we all care for the game and want Turbine to make the decision that will make each of us stay (happily). That's obviosuly not possible, but it does seem that as time goes on, more and more people are ending up leaving because of their choice in end-game content, and only time will tell how that goes for them. I want the game to get as far as it can, but I want it to be fun, and I can't find that much that Turbine makes that is fun except the quests.

[bobbylobs]

Just wanted to remind everyone of the community guidelines, and of the real purpose of this thread. Perhaps this is an issue best tabled for now, or moved elsewhere.

Why would you do that?

I never saw you post a link to the community guidelines during the isengard runs when people started discussing answers to questions regarding the housing update, or when talking about the beorning class.

This thread is titled SHIELD runs through moria Q&A-notes on what was said is it not? has anyone been discussing something that wasnt said? or is it just that people are discussing something you are not happy about or the discussion has gone in a way you dont care for?

This site comes in for a lot of criticism for the way it handles open and honest discussion, Sapience recently posted these very words "Basically, if you truly wish to have you comments seen by the team and make any kind of meaningful impact, this or the other official channels are the best place to do that. All that is asked is you follow very simple, basic courtesy and common sense rules as you see in the community guidelines. It's pretty simple."

No-one in this thread has deviated from that apart from yourself, I politely suggest you keep to transcribing the runs and transcribing alone if you do not wish to contribute to the perfectly legitimate discussion and let the moderation team moderate.

Regards
Bobbylobs.

[Runesi_EU]

As far as I remember they where talking about bigger raid instances and not regular group content, that only requires 3-6 man groups. So they have not abandoned group content, just 12 man multiboss/instanced raids (for the foreseeable future).
In fact, we are getting some new group content with the next update 14, but just less sophisticated as we are used to.

I read this

14.Question about new 3 and 6 man instances.
Sapience - The broader answer is that when they say raids they mean group instances. Group content is not out of the question, but what we consider traditional raids and traditional instance clusters pretty much falls under Rowan's comments. They've been saying for a year that there are no raids or that type of content in the roadmap in the foreseeable future or planned. Rewording the question will not change the answer. He's sorry to be the bearer of bad news. It is not new news.

That they consider 3 and 6 man traditional instanced content to be raids as well.

[Dernudan]

I read this



That they consider 3 and 6 man traditional instanced content to be raids as well.

I simply do not understand why he would say this. There IS 3/6 man content coming. There is a 3 man instance in U14.

[Decaran]

I'm curious how EB's stack up to Raids in terms of both cost to develop and player use.

This. Sapience, can you comment on this? I would guess that the cost of developing a raid, and the cost of developing an EB would not actually be far off. Especially when you consider in an economic sense, cost is literally everything that goes into the content, and over half a year later, we are still seeing EB sidequests that are near impossible or too easy, and seeing a broken threat mechanic that has been asked to be changed since day 1. What has that cost us? I know a lot of players who just couldn't be bothered and left.

If there is no interest in raids/group instances, why the need to scale so many of the old ones up? If nobody is using them, then why bother?

This cannot be restated enough. There must be people running raids and asking for them for the devs to put this on the table, which would negate the argument against new raids (imo)...

I agree with Mirnir, to me, the "no raids" answer has evolved from "not in 2014" to "not planned in the foreseeable future."

While this may be written off by some as a "slight change in wording," it is a huge semantic shift. For exactly the reason below.

It becomes a distinction because I would assume, correct me if I'm wrong, that the Cirith Ungol is at the very least in the early planning stages. Between Shelob's Lair, The Guard Tower, Minas Morgul, the caves near the Black Gate, if the plan for these areas doesn't include Instances and Raids, I would really like to know. For me at least that would be a huge disappointment, as they are areas begging for IC's/Raids, as well as Skirmishes, in my mind to the same degree as Mounted Combat for Rohan, it's just expected.

Cirith Ungol and Minas Morgul would make EXCELLENT traditional raid locations, or maybe a 6 man Cirith Ungol and 12 man Minas Morgul. I have also seen this idea pop up quite a bit.

Sapience, it might make posters feel a bit more understanding if you could show us the raw data that you are citing, rather than just quoting it. If I ever submit an academic paper saying "so-and-so claims XYZ," and did not explicitly state where this information could be found for ANYONE to view easily, it would be plagiarism. Obviously you are not plagiarising, but if people can't see the data for themselves, they are less-likely to believe you. Please correct me if this information is available somewhere.

In terms of things being expensive, maybe making the game more open to player created content, or just using the players as a development tool in general. There are plenty of threads with fully fleshed-out ideas that would just be a matter of coding (which I bet there are even players who would be willing to write that for Turbine as well, free of charge). This would at least cut out the development and mechanics stage of the devs' work (or a large chunk of it anyway).

I also think it is worth noting the "where it is appropriate comment." In all honesty, EBs are not as much fun as traditional raids, but they make a LOT more sense for the Battle for Helm's Deep than a traditional raid would. The reasoning? Epic Battles are defensive battles, while a traditional raid is offensive. Think of it like defensive vs offensive skirmish. Would Necromancer's Gate make sense if we stood at the main gate the whole time and defended against waves of mobs? Not really, as we are trying to storm Dol Guldur. Would rushing out of Helm's Dike into 10,000 mobs from Isengard (with a force that pales in copmarison) make any sense? Not really.

My main issue with the Epic Battles is that the epic quest and 2 trait points are gated behind them, so I have to take 9 alts through them.

[Mar-Evayave]

Sooooo.... last night at 1 AM the forums went haywire (literally nothing was loading and when pinging the forums most of the packages were lost/timed out), and it looks like my post never made it to the light of day. It's a good thing I c/p my post to OpenOffice (though apparently that made a few things in formatting a little wonky). Oookay... Here it is again. xD

Lower sales translated into reduced revenue which has no doubt lowered Lotro's support and development budgets...which ultimately lead to the lay-offs earlier this year.

This has led to the cancelation of most if not all marginal and poor revenue producing content, i.e.,raids and instanced clusters!

I also believe that EB content from Helm's Deep has under preformed as well. However, is seems that Turbine is still riding 'the intial investment wave' of this content and associated tech to hopefully recoup as much as possible as further tweaking of this tech in upcoming updates rolls out later this year.

It is too bad for those whose primary interest in Lotro centered around the further developed of these raids and instances!

It is however, interesting to learn that raids and instances were only being supported by a larger player base that in reality paid them little or no attention and when the numbers of that base began to drop it is no wonder that Turbine would be forced to put that type of content on indefinite hold.

I can only speak to a few things of note. I know nothing of population now vs 8 years from now and I know nothing of their income from any expansion. I can point out a few things, though.

There were, if memory serves, some lay-offs well before HD was released for purchase, and raids and IC were already slated as not coming. We got EBs with HD. Considering the amount of time required to develop raids (I believe12-18 months has been mentioned at some point), they clearly had set raids aside quite a while before HD launched so that they could focus on the EBs instead (or at least it seems clear to me).

I would agree that EBs did not (seem) to perform well at all. As I previously theorized, I think EBs were the raiding life-line. An attempt to draw more people into the grouping crowd. When EBs failed to do that,I suppose the proverbial towel was thrown in. EBs quite possibly could be cheaper to create than brand new raids. The foundation is already there and the foundation can be used over and over in new content. Each of the current EBs are more or less different versions of the same thing. How often can the same be said of traditional IC?

I think, especially considering how many people probably buy the xpacs with TPs (piece-meal, at that), that perhaps not even everyone was supporting that content. They neither supported nor participated in that content. And then a good number more (as you say) purchased the full xpac but again didn't play the ICs. Only a small number apparently had any prolonged interest in raids.

Some might call it life-saver mode. To me, that sounds uncharacteristically negative. Usually a life-saver is a good thing. And, what's more, if the alternative is NOT life-saving... then what is the point? Spite because a company is trying to make sure its products remain in working order is spite for spite's sake. It seems too many would rather it go under. Or perhaps mistakenly believe that, without traditional raids, then it will go under. And while I understand the line of reasoning that would say that it takes all kinds, I also recognize that supporting content that costs a great deal of time and money with little return will only run the product to the ground.

If they had data for 8 years and it was constant over that period why stop making them only now?

Also just looking at usage data ignores two important factors: Halo Effect and Critical Mass.

Halo Effect; Lots of players see raiders walking around with nice gear but are unable to raid much themselves, but the longing to be part of that scene keeps them hanging around, even if they aren't actively raiding 5/6 days a week.

Critical Mass: Once the raiders leave and your server is no longer full of "glff: LFF Sambrog 5/6 speed runs", etc it no longer looks like the happening place to be and people will drift off to other games. Its especially cringeworthy when you see people trying for 30 mins or more to find enough people on the whole server for a 3-man.

For the "why now" question, refer back to Post #48.

Well, for what it's worth, I highly doubt people stick around so they can look at what other people have. If people are just in it for the cosmetic appearance, then they will just go find their cosmetics elsewhere in the game -- there are plenty of cosmetics to choose from. And at least on Riddermark, GLFF was never full of that sort of thing. GLFF on Riddermark is 7 parts trash-talk, 2 parts idle chatter, and 1 part Global Looking For Fellowship. And it gets worse all the time. Additionally... the vast majority of the active player base (aka: the people actively logged into the servers at any given time) are not even watching GLFF. And this is also under the hugely exaggerated belief that all the raiders are gonna go poof. I am a raider. I'm not going anywhere. *shrug*

Frick- The latter half there did cross my mind earlier in the thread (in that the topic was exploding with interest), butI haven't seen anyone break any rules, and the OP can always link to specific Q&A transcripts, so that nothing "official" is lost. I might've missed a fewposts, though (goodness, people post so fast...). I was justthinking to myself, though, that everyone seems to be keeping thingsunder a little bit of restraint for a change, which is nice. Or, if someone above is correct and you were referring to the rule about derailing threads, in all fairness this is not an official, Turbine-created thread. It may be endorsed by Sapience, but it's not an official Turbine team thread (be it in community, development, etc). And, in all fairness, the topic was raised in the Q&A.

[Ingiogal]

The data by itself isn't my concern. What is my concern is the interpretation.

Consider:

-My kin needed a Burg when the Draigoch raid was coming out. The only reason I leveled that toon was for my kin to have fs maneuvers for that raid.
-My kin was low on tanks so I leveled a tank.
-I waited around doing grindy stuff while waiting to group up.
-I crafted items so newly leveled new kinmates had reasonable gear to do group activities.
- I ran Hybold so that my gear didn't make me a liability during group content.
- I worked on virtues, again so that I wasn't a group liability
- I ran festivals quests while waiting for that final group member to join up
- I optimized second age weapons, legacies etc for group play. (As of now, only one my toons has a 2nd age level 95 legendary - they aren't needed to successfully complete content being ran on my server)

The data would show all of this time was not spent grouping etc.... In reality it ALL was associated with the goal of or waiting on group play.

We must also, in fairness, consider the similar point that quite a few people in game are actively being discouraged from joining raids. When this happens often enough, raiding drops off.

My best example = Me.

I have toons of many classes and I go far enough back in game time to have experienced the game in multiple forms.

Experience #1 - When I was leveling a young minstrel, back in the day when you couldn't consider a group without a healer, he was "vigorously pursued" (because harassed and harangued are such charged words) for group content. When I said that I didn't want to raid at that time, I got called quite a few names and told what a selfish so-and-so I am. I set myself anonymous starting at lvl 25 and didn't take it off until I got to Moria.

Experience #2 - When the same minstrel toon was post-Moria and questing Dunland, he (meaning ME) was badgered for an afternoon to join a Moria raid. This was still in the days when it was a significant cost to retrait a class because we didn't have multiple trees ready and waiting and I've never been a rich toon so I was reluctant. I was told by several people in the raid that (a) I would be compensated for the cost of traiting specifically to suit them and then traiting back afterwards and that (b) any drops suitable for my class would be guaranteed to me by this fellow as master looter as an incentive for joining their raid and (c) that I could trust the raid leader. I acquiesced to their pleas. I heal them through their raid and the end result: I never got a single copper of the retraiting money I was promised. A minstrel-appropriate LI dropped and was kept by the master looter who was the same individual who had promised it to me. I asked why and he replied with a statement equivalent to 'shut up, sucker.'

Experience #3 - A raiding kin attempted to poach from my kin. The raiding kin player told one of our members that my kin sucked. He told our member that he should not hang with losers. He told our member that it was a waste of his time to try to raid with us and he should just cut us loose. He said that there was no point in letting other people raid or teaching more people to raid because it would just make it harder for him to fill his groups when people had other alternatives. That the truest raiders were keeping it to themselves. (Yeah, I know. Sounds stupid. So stupid that I debated posting it because I figured people wouldn't believe me but I decided to go ahead and say it.)

Experience #4 - A very good guy in my kin attempted to help me learn raiding so that our kin as a whole could try to raid more as a group. This very good guy is a talented raid leader and he invited me to join a party he was forming to do a run I had never seen with a LM (a class I had never fellowed with before). My friend the raid leader had specifically asked me to emphasize CC, buffs in general, stuns on particular mobs, and stun immunity/off-healing in particular on the tank. Yes, we wiped on the final boss. People screamed that we wiped because I wasn't doing enough DPS. Still others screamed at how I wasn't healing everyone. He and I were both criticized for my participation in the party. "We don't have time to teach people how to play the game." Funny how no one contradicted his instructions at the front of the run but found it so easy to decide to blame me at the end of the run... So my friend was trying to be a nice guy and we were both being abused for it.

I'll be fair and say that I've also had some exemplary experiences raiding. The two great raid guys in my kin have given me some of my best experiences in the game. I've enjoyed quite a few raids and I've had a good time with some great people.

But, in total experience, there's very little motivating me to raid and I can entirely understand why the data cited by Turbine indicates that raiding isn't what most people do. It's not what I spend most of my time doing and, based on the really rotten experiences I've had that centered on raiding, raiding will probably never become a priority for me. It's a shame because it was never the content that kept me from raiding, it was other players ruining raiding for me.

With respect:

[Sapience]

here is the main issue with what this thread has become. I quote Min, not to single them out, but because it's a representative post that highlights the issue I'm addressing.

When you take them off the table for update 11, HD, Update 13 and now Update 14, how do expect any one left to use the content. Players who enjoy that content are long long gone. How many more updates should go without them before we lose hope of ever seeing another? Do you think at update 22 it's going to be a good time to introduce raids and group instances back into the fold? I would not expect the folks who used that content regularly to be around at that point.
If you take away a child's rattle at age 2 is he going to want it back when he's 16? There are plenty of other free to play games that will provide these players with the content they are after without begging for it.

The argument ignores that virtually every update prior to 11 had the content in question and it was not widely utilized. It would be more accurate to say that it is unlikely that an 8 year old, who has not played in any meaningful way with the toys they have had since birth will suddenly find interest in them at 16.

I think Sapience has made it quite clear that there are no plans to bring it back. Leaving the hope on the table for those who enjoy that content is cruel. that's called stringing people along. It will be interesting to find out what content replaces it though.

I think anyone who has been paying attention knew this long ago. Our message has been very clear for more than a year that classic raids and clusters were not coming.

In the future, as relates to these events, the question on raids will be passed. If you'd like to continue the discussion please feel free to use the raids forum, but let's keep this thread clear as it will no longer be a topic addressed in these runs.

[bobbylobs]

here is the main issue with what this thread has become. I quote Min, not to single them out, but because it's a representative post that highlights the issue I'm addressing.



The argument ignores that virtually every update prior to 11 had the content in question and it was not widely utilized. It would be more accurate to say that it is unlikely that an 8 year old, who has not played in any meaningful way with the toys they have had since birth will suddenly find interest in them at 16.



I think anyone who has been paying attention knew this long ago. Our message has been very clear for more than a year that classic raids and clusters were not coming.

In the future, as relates to these events, the question on raids will be passed. If you'd like to continue the discussion please feel free to use the raids forum, but let's keep this thread clear as it will no longer be a topic addressed in these runs.

Are you surprised by how many people are continually asking about this topic considering hardly anyone (apparently) uses it?

I mean it is by far and away the single most discussed topic on these forums, yet apparently no-one plays them, does that mean that the festivals/concerts/cosmetic pets are used even less? As they make up a very small proportion of what is discussed here compared to how many people want raids back.

Just go check out the new producers thread and see how many people want raids back compared to wanting other things in game.

[Radbug]

In the future, as relates to these events, the question on raids will be passed. If you'd like to continue the discussion please feel free to use the raids forum, but let's keep this thread clear as it will no longer be a topic addressed in these runs.

Your analogy doesn't begin to address the issue at hand. You haven't defined 'meaningful' or attempted to ascertain what is meaningful to the 'child'.



Not much point in using the Raids sub-forum when the threads there either get locked without explanation:

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...ntent-with-U14

Or just simply ignored and left to wither on the vine (somewhat ironically):

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...gh-ALL-of-2015

[Runesi_EU]

If you'd like to continue the discussion please feel free to use the raids forum

Done

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...=1#post7190204

[Sapience]

Your analogy doesn't begin to address the issue at hand. You haven't defined 'meaningful' or attempted to ascertain what is meaningful to the 'child'.



Not much point in using the Raids sub-forum when the threads there either get locked without explanation:

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...ntent-with-U14

Or just simply ignored and left to wither on the vine (somewhat ironically):

https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...gh-ALL-of-2015

False on all counts. My truly final comment here. We have 8 years of data. If that data showed something else we'd do something else. It doesn't. We aren't. It is that simple. You can choose to believe it or not, but the facts are what they are.

End.

[DanteIL]

This is an interesting discussion (and even though the question about raids/instances may no longer be answered, that doesn't mean that these questions will no longer be respectfully asked).

This discussion also highlights for me just how much of a disappointment the Epic Battles have been from a design perspective. Given the apparent fact that the traditional raid/instance clusters in the game were being (regularly?) utilized by only a relatively small subset of the population, I can see now that the Epic Battles were partially an attempt to design a grouping system that hopefully would be more open to and utilized by a larger slice of the player base (thus providing a better ROI from a cost/benefit standpoint). Hence, several design decisions: a) Implement upscaling (no trivial task) to allow characters to join Epic Battles from level 10 (even though this makes no sense from a lore perspective); b) Design an Epic Battles-only progression system that would allow anyone -- not just super-geared raiders -- to put points back into their characters to improve Epic Battle success; c) allow useful gear to drop that would also scale by level/reward.

Each of these aspects of Epic Battles, in theory, would allow these spaces to be more appealing and more accessible to a wider range of players than the typical instance-cluster, which often requires more complicated level/prerequisite/gear mechanics. Unfortunately, the upscaling turned out to be weak at best (again, this is no trivial task), and the progression system turned out to be problematic in two ways: Because of the desire to make the Epic Battles open to nearly anybody, the Battle-specific progression system (and of course the actual Battles) doesn't have much to do with one's regular class, and -- most importantly, I think -- the progression system is too punishing for low-ranked characters, thus defeating the goal of making the Battles accessible to a wider slice of players. Perhaps U14 will help with this last point. Also, the gear mechanics turned out to be too frustrating for many players. Notice that these are structural factors -- this leaves aside the question of whether the Epic Battles are "fun" or not. I happen to think that they aren't fun in the least, but at least I think I have a better understanding of why they were designed the way they were -- as a way to introduce instanced content that could be run by a larger segment of the player base.

[Pony-o]

As it has been established that a new raid in LOTRO has the chance of a snowball in Mordor ... how are the chances of smaller traditional instances?
At this point even the prospect of a single classic 3-man instance released in 2016 would make me jump for joy.

[Dernudan]

@Pony-0
There is a single classic 3 man instance coming this Summer in U14. It is currently on Bullroarer if you want to check it out.

[Decaran]

The argument ignores that virtually every update prior to 11 had the content in question and it was not widely utilized. It would be more accurate to say that it is unlikely that an 8 year old, who has not played in any meaningful way with the toys they have had since birth will suddenly find interest in them at 16.

I respectfully disagree. Once all the raiders leave LOTRO, introduce traditional raids 5 months later, and the remaining players will think "A NEW SHINY THING" and will try them. Give a child a new toy, and he will ignore the other ones for a while if it is worth it (EBs clearly weren't for most people).

I think anyone who has been paying attention knew this long ago. Our message has been very clear for more than a year that classic raids and clusters were not coming.

So why start out with saying "no new raids in the next year" if it is already decided there will never be new traditional raids? This is the kind of opaqueness that harms customer relations. I think that is the question that the raiders would like answered, as well as the motivation behind this (in more clear terms).

In the future, as relates to these events, the question on raids will be passed. If you'd like to continue the discussion please feel free to use the raids forum, but let's keep this thread clear as it will no longer be a topic addressed in these runs.

As I stated, people will continue to ask until they get a satisfactory, detailed answer other than "because we said so." Children don't like when their parents say that, and paying customers surely don't like it either.

False on all counts. My truly final comment here. We have 8 years of data. If that data showed something else we'd do something else. It doesn't. We aren't. It is that simple. You can choose to believe it or not, but the facts are what they are.

End.

I know you stated this was your final comment, and I respect that, but as I stated in my earlier post, maybe if you could link the actual data in .pdf format, people would more readily accept it. The only reason I can see for not linking the data is that it doesn't quite show what we are being told... though I hope this is not the case