Solo version of the raid

[Arnenna]

You are comparing apples and oranges. The game delivers story in a multitude of ways (and not through a single medium like a movie), as it should, and not all of it should be solo when the game itself is not solo - did you all ever stop to think that putting stories into instances and raids actually encourages people to group up to experience them? People who may not necessarily have done so (who did not necessarily have an aversion to it, but, just never did) are suddenly grouping with people and having fun, together with other people because they are being encouraged to do so. You do realise that group content is more often than not the driving force behind major updates in more than 90% of MMOs? Why do you think they are pushing out more raids and more instances per level cap as opposed to 115 for example? Because they realised what people respond to, and what makes money.

Raids absolutely do have the power to pull in players and get their feet wet. That's how most of us first got into them. It doesn't catch those that are not ever going to be drawn into them though, or those that cannot do them due to permanent RL circumstances. They should be left out from the thing that pulled them into the game in the first place then? The story.

Question. If they were to wrap up a few major storylines via solo quests, outside of the raid, what do you lose?

Nothing is the answer to that. Other than some knowledge that you've seen the ending to something, where some others cannot.

You know, where there is a will, there is a way. They could hold off adding these solo, alternative routes to story endings, until the raid has died off. All those that were to be tempted to get their feet wet in the raid, will have done so by then. Some will love their new found experience, some won't and will never enter a raid again.

[Arnenna]

tl; dr: you are asking them to use extra time and resources to fulfill a selfish desire, because you don't really care about all type of players, just your solo play. if solo versions of raids have never been maid in 15 years, there must be a reason, right?

It's far more selfish to want to keep story endings in one place tied to one playstyle.

As it happens, they do make solo versions of instances now, and they are popular - very popular. Those may also have some bearing on players wanting to try something a little bit more group orientated. The Epic quest lines end stories off all the time, it's not a new concept, it already exists in game and has done for the last 15 years. Get away from this notion that people want SSG to build them solo raids. They don't. They want a simple quest to wrap up a storyline in their playstyle, just like raiders get to wrap it up in theirs.

Man, how to blow something out of proportion. SSG make nay on 200 quests per content update. One more, to end a storyline that is ALSO finishing up inside a raid, isn't going to make any difference. Anyone thinking that one quest is going to be too resource heavy, when there are over 12K of them in the game, is clutching at major straws.

[TesalionLortus]

I'm not afraid of anything, and I didn't say "devoted raiders" - I specifically said people who had not necessarily ever grouped up much before, are encouraged to do so by the nature of the story which opens them up into an aspect of the game they may not have necessarily explored otherwise (for one who claims I don't read what you have said, you frequently do not even appear to acknowledge what I say most of the time, but carry on), and yes, it is encouraged, not everyone is here for the lore, or the stories, some people are just playing doing their own thing. And Tier 1 raids are not a "time-consuming process/challenge of raiding", they are becoming more widely accessible to all creeds of lotro players, and in most cases the current HH on tier 1 takes no longer than 45 minutes, even with a majority of new people.

I know what you said, and my point stands. You're implying here you folks need these people to be drawn to raids in this way, otherwise it might be some "danger" for the game and your enjoyment, with raider population decreasing if people are not "encouraged" in this way, which I find bizarre. Why not stop "encouraging" people but still make fun raids so you and everyone else who is interested in that can enjoy them. And believe me, with each update there is a big flashy screen telling people there is a new raid in a package, so clearly anyone interested in that is aware and if they're intrigued they may try it and still get drawn to it and have fun - no need to "encourage" = force into by gating hyper relevant conclusions and story bits.

And there is no harm in game design encouraging people to group up, given that as I said above, group content is literally one of the major driving forces (if not the biggest) behind most expansions, which again, is why we are seeing more and more instances and raids at level caps as opposed to the dry period we had from 95-115. People respond to it, and it makes money.

Look how well lotro did during 95-100 when the only content to speak of was Big Battles, why do you think they made a return to actual instances and raids? Because they are successful and the "solo" only mindset was not.

They made Epic Battles for story reasons. Literally that's it. That's why they existed. And that's why they've become needless after MT. So they could fully go back to raids. Also, the devs, at the time, never thought the game will be still around for After the Fall storyline, so, in that way, "there will be no more raids" might have been true. But since they're still around, Epic Battles are not needed/useful for conveying narrative of grand battles anymore, they can just do raids. Kinda natural. There is no major "but mooooney, raiders give us money" in this situation. Non-raider players give them money too, regardless of how often they log in, whether they grind dailies every day etc etc. Everyone pays for new content in equal measure.

[Hephburz-2]

I know what you said, and my point stands. You're implying here you folks need these people to be drawn to raids in this way, otherwise it might be some "danger" for the game and your enjoyment, with raider population decreasing if people are not "encouraged" in this way, which I find bizarre.

I'm implying nothing of the kind, you are making absolute false assumptions and twisting my words and you need to stop trying to imply things I'm not saying to fit your own narrative.

[TesalionLortus]

I'm implying nothing of the kind, you are making absolute false assumptions and twisting my words and you need to stop trying to imply things I'm not saying to fit your own narrative.

Then you must clarify yourself, because if that's not the consequence that you imply might happen, then you're not making any sense whatsoever in being against providing options to players other than just "because" - which is a poor argument. Either there is an actual real or perceived hurt/negative effect you might think might happen if players were provided with such options of seeing a story resolution, even if that's not in raids, or... what then? What drives you to oppose these ideas if there is no harm?

[Hephburz-2]

Then you must clarify yourself, because if that's not the consequence that you imply might happen, then you're not making any sense whatsoever in being against providing options to players other than just "because" - which is a poor argument. Either there is an actual real or perceived hurt/negative effect you might think might happen if players were provided with such options of seeing a story resolution, even if that's not in raids, or... what then? What drives you to oppose these ideas if there is no harm?

All I said was, it encourages people into raids, no conclusion needs to be drawn. That is a statement, and a fact, end of it. Which in itself, is a great thing, because instances/raids are large parts of the revnue, another fact which can be drawn from the contast of the level 95-100 period.

[Hephburz-2]

They made Epic Battles for story reasons. Literally that's it. That's why they existed. And that's why they've become needless after MT. So they could fully go back to raids. Also, the devs, at the time, never thought the game will be still around for After the Fall storyline, so, in that way, "there will be no more raids" might have been true. But since they're still around, Epic Battles are not needed/useful for conveying narrative of grand battles anymore, they can just do raids. Kinda natural. There is no major "but mooooney, raiders give us money" in this situation. Non-raider players give them money too, regardless of how often they log in, whether they grind dailies every day etc etc. Everyone pays for new content in equal measure.

Lol, I'm sorry? Are we playing the same game?

There was a GIGANTIC drop in player activity with Helms Deep, and why? Because they announced there would be no more traditional instance cluster/raids - coupled with the trait trees, players were driven away in their thousands. You only need to look at Level 105 and the release of Throne of the Dread Terror to just draw a comparison about how many people returned, bought, and played that raid Vs how many people stopped playing during Helms Deep.

Epic Battles were not essential, the story could have been delivered in an instance or raid exactly as Throne was delivered to us as the culmination of the Battle of Pelennor Fields. I'm not saying solo players don't contribute money to the game, I am simply saying, from history, it is not very hard to see where they are getting money from, if they weren't getting money from raids/instances would the continue to develop them, and develop multiple raids/instances for the same level cap? Which prior to 130 hadn't been done since 85 (realistically 75/65).

[Elmagor]

Lol, I'm sorry? Are we playing the same game?

There was a GIGANTIC drop in player activity with Helms Deep, and why? Because they announced there would be no more traditional instance cluster/raids - coupled with the trait trees, players were driven away in their thousands. You only need to look at Level 105 and the release of Throne of the Dread Terror to just draw a comparison about how many people returned, bought, and played that raid Vs how many people stopped playing during Helms Deep.

Epic Battles were not essential, the story could have been delivered in an instance or raid exactly as Throne was delivered to us as the culmination of the Battle of Pelennor Fields. I'm not saying solo players don't contribute money to the game, I am simply saying, from history, it is not very hard to see where they are getting money from, if they weren't getting money from raids/instances would the continue to develop them, and develop multiple raids/instances for the same level cap? Which prior to 130 hadn't been done since 85 (realistically 75/65).

We have 3 gigantic drops in player activity:

Biggest one was during Helm's Deep, you right about everything with that
Second was during Mordor, because many people consider that as end of story + Mordor wasn't polished and don't have instances at first
Thrid was in 2022 after Gundabad when we don't have new high level content for 8 months

All three drops have TWO factors: we don't have new classic instances + developers keep slience about when we will get them

[Neinda]

All I said was, it encourages people into raids, no conclusion needs to be drawn. That is a statement, and a fact, end of it. Which in itself, is a great thing, because instances/raids are large parts of the revnue, another fact which can be drawn from the contast of the level 95-100 period.

If I am not yet level cap, an unfinished quest chain is not going to encourage me to become a raider. The only thing that less than level cap raid quest does is leave me frustrated after running around completing quests and trying to progress a story. There is a big difference between old content that has been tossed aside by the end game portion of the player base and actual end game content.

How does completing that level 65 quest for In Their Absence change anything about actual end game content and raids? If anything, the lack of a system to complete content in the earlier part of the game discourages people from continuing on in the game in many cases. Chasing an ever increasing end game and leaving large portions of the story unfinished as you level is not exactly my idea of fun. I would think that end game people would want something like this to move people on more quickly and get them to end game. Finishing quests and stories in a simplified way rather than spending time trying to find a raid group, learning the lower level raid and completing it before moving on does not support your goal of more end game raid interested people. Not all of us can solo raids on level.

P.S. If I don't raid because real life does not allow me the time to raid, not being able to finish a quest chain because it requires a raid is not going to encourage me to raid. Real life pays the bills and pays for the game. Raids don't do that.

Note: There are two very different opinions here about what the game should be. There is room in LOTRO for both raid and solo play styles. Supporting each other in their preferred play style is good for the game and good for the community. There are ways to make both systems work side by side.

[Hephburz-2]

If I am not yet level cap, an unfinished quest chain is not going to encourage me to become a raider. The only thing that less than level cap raid quest does is leave me frustrated after running around completing quests and trying to progress a story. There is a big difference between old content that has been tossed aside by the end game portion of the player base and actual end game content.

How does completing that level 65 quest for In Their Absence change anything about actual end game content and raids? If anything, the lack of a system to complete content in the earlier part of the game discourages people from continuing on in the game in many cases. Chasing an ever increasing end game and leaving large portions of the story unfinished as you level is not exactly my idea of fun. I would think that end game people would want something like this to move people on more quickly and get them to end game. Finishing quests and stories in a simplified way rather than spending time trying to find a raid group, learning the lower level raid and completing it before moving on does not support your goal of more end game raid interested people. Not all of us can solo raids on level.

P.S. If I don't raid because real life does not allow me the time to raid, not being able to finish a quest chain because it requires a raid is not going to encourage me to raid. Real life pays the bills and pays for the game. Raids don't do that.

Note: There are two very different opinions here about what the game should be. There is room in LOTRO for both raid and solo play styles. Supporting each other in their preferred play style is good for the game and good for the community. There are ways to make both systems work side by side.

Already answered this;

First, anything pre-105, you can go through on a quest geared Level 140 character and probably one shot everything along the way by yourself, ignoring mechanics and enjoying the story, so, that is irrelevant.
Secondly, I cannot, for the life of me recall how many kins over the years I have seen, on multiple servers, that are "level-capped" kinships that slowly progress through the level caps to re-experience everything.
Thirdly, there are a wealth of unofficial lotro discords out there, and if all else fails these forums exist to help you find other likeminded people who would be interested in completing that content with you or simply helping out.
Lastly, the legendary servers were created for the EXACT reason you are complaining about.

And as a final note, you seriously seem to underestimate the number of people who actually enjoy the older content? Which is by far some of the best lotro has to offer.

The solutions to your problems are there if you care to look for them.

[TesalionLortus]

All I said was, it encourages people into raids, no conclusion needs to be drawn. That is a statement, and a fact, end of it. Which in itself, is a great thing, because instances/raids are large parts of the revnue, another fact which can be drawn from the contast of the level 95-100 period.

Lol, I'm sorry? Are we playing the same game?

There was a GIGANTIC drop in player activity with Helms Deep, and why? Because they announced there would be no more traditional instance cluster/raids - coupled with the trait trees, players were driven away in their thousands. You only need to look at Level 105 and the release of Throne of the Dread Terror to just draw a comparison about how many people returned, bought, and played that raid Vs how many people stopped playing during Helms Deep.

Epic Battles were not essential, the story could have been delivered in an instance or raid exactly as Throne was delivered to us as the culmination of the Battle of Pelennor Fields. I'm not saying solo players don't contribute money to the game, I am simply saying, from history, it is not very hard to see where they are getting money from, if they weren't getting money from raids/instances would the continue to develop them, and develop multiple raids/instances for the same level cap? Which prior to 130 hadn't been done since 85 (realistically 75/65).

And you know all of this with such business revenue convictions how? You have access to all the data of SSG? Also, you basically contradict yourself, because if that's true and money rule everything as in raids = money, then you don't need to force people into raids in order for raids to remain attractive and providing SSG with money. So you're perfectly safe and the game is perfectly safe to allow people to experience stories without being "encouraged" to raids and all is alight with the world, there will be still plenty of people up for raids. I don't see the issue at all.

Also, I don't really think Helm's Deep / MT could have been done with just raid mechanics, would have been lame feeling (since it was a siege, not open field like Pelennor). Kinda like Caras Gelebren, as a siege instance, is a bit lame/unimpressive with skirmish mechanics. Also, I know people do that but I wouldn't put the blame on Epic Battles, people might have been burnt out with Rohan and Gondor too. Which I kinda liked and am fond of, in a way, because they were these consequential journeys from start to finish rather than jumping around and dragging things out apparently, which has become this game's newest approach, but it is what it is now.

[Arnenna]

And you know all of this with such business revenue convictions how? You have access to all the data of SSG? Also, you basically contradict yourself, because if that's true and money rule everything as in raids = money, then you don't need to force people into raids in order for raids to remain attractive and providing SSG with money. So you're perfectly safe and the game is perfectly safe to allow people to experience stories without being "encouraged" to raids and all is alight with the world, there will be still plenty of people up for raids. I don't see the issue at all.

Also, I don't really think Helm's Deep / MT could have been done with just raid mechanics, would have been lame feeling (since it was a siege, not open field like Pelennor). Kinda like Caras Gelebren, as a siege instance, is a bit lame/unimpressive with skirmish mechanics. Also, I know people do that but I wouldn't put the blame on Epic Battles, people might have been burnt out with Rohan and Gondor too. Which I kinda liked and am fond of, in a way, because they were these consequential journeys from start to finish rather than jumping around and dragging things out apparently, which has become this game's newest approach, but it is what it is now.

In fairness, nobody really needs some form of insight into the games business revenue to know that Helm's Deep was a problem. Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed the solo content of Helm's Deep, but as a major update it was fundamentally flawed due to the lack of proper group content. Players left the game in droves and it was noticeable - in game. It wasn't so much about there being Epic Battles, that in itself wasn't the issue. The issue was a statement made, that there would be no more raids. It wasn't as if they said that they were using these battles for this update as it would be better suited to the story, and that raids would return in a later update. It was a brutal - No more Raids - ever, kind of statement. The reasoning they offered is that they were too expensive to develop with only 10% of the playerbase using them. There was massive fallout on the boards here about it, but Turbine dug in their heals and more or less set it in stone. Thankfully they reversed it later, but before they did, they took the solo game a step further with West Gondor - where there was absolutely zip for any player to do in a group. Nothing, nada, zero. They went full 180 on grouping, to their own demise. Nobody ever asked for a solo only game. That's not fair for people that enjoy grouping up with others. It failed, which is understandable and the only way it could have gone because the game needs both types of players to fill a playerbase. Level 105 brought Throne, and plenty more group content, alongside plenty of solo content, and that's when things started to get back on track.

Any update that is only catering to one type of player is losing revenue. It cuts both ways. The latest update, instances and a future raid only? If that 10% figure that Turbine mentioned was correct, that's 90% lost revenue because people that don't group aren't going to pay for it. Why would they, if they don't play that type of playstyle?

[Hephburz-2]

And you know all of this with such business revenue convictions how? You have access to all the data of SSG? Also, you basically contradict yourself, because if that's true and money rule everything as in raids = money, then you don't need to force people into raids in order for raids to remain attractive and providing SSG with money. So you're perfectly safe and the game is perfectly safe to allow people to experience stories without being "encouraged" to raids and all is alight with the world, there will be still plenty of people up for raids. I don't see the issue at all.

It's called cause and effect. You can literally see the effect that successful raids & instance clusters are having by the sheer fact they are giving us more than we have had since level65, now why would they do that? Unless it was making them money? Pretty straight forward assessment. It's not "forcing" people into raids - it's encouraging them with the story.

Also, I don't really think Helm's Deep / MT could have been done with just raid mechanics, would have been lame feeling (since it was a siege, not open field like Pelennor). Kinda like Caras Gelebren, as a siege instance, is a bit lame/unimpressive with skirmish mechanics. Also, I know people do that but I wouldn't put the blame on Epic Battles, people might have been burnt out with Rohan and Gondor too.

No. The reason was Epic Battles. Or do you want me to link you the many hundreds of threads and posts from people saying they left the game for that exact reason.? People quit in their thousands within a month of Helms Deep being released, nothing to do with "burnout" and everything to do with the absolute #### content of that time. It is also quite easy to make it a dungeon or raid, could simply have us atop the deeping wall working our way from atop the wall, to the breach, to the hornburg, killing npc's and bosses as we go as the battle rages around us, simple.

[TesalionLortus]

It's called cause and effect. You can literally see the effect that successful raids & instance clusters are having by the sheer fact they are giving us more than we have had since level65, now why would they do that? Unless it was making them money? Pretty straight forward assessment. It's not "forcing" people into raids - it's encouraging them with the story.

No. The reason was Epic Battles. Or do you want me to link you the many hundreds of threads and posts from people saying they left the game for that exact reason.? People quit in their thousands within a month of Helms Deep being released, nothing to do with "burnout" and everything to do with the absolute #### content of that time.

I believe in actual data. Not cause and effect in some player's head or raging quitters on the forum. If they truly saw your version of things in the data and money were going down the drain, why didn't they implement a raid/inni for Pelargil and siege of MT straight away, I wonder...

Yes, encouraging, call it what you will. Doesn't change the fact it's gatekeeping. Use any word that you want, the cause and effect are the same, you won't make any player enjoy raiding if they don't want to and these people are still being showed a middle finger, with how things work currently, the new raid is next and seems like it'll actually give justice to cool "abandoned" plot.

It is also quite easy to make it a dungeon or raid, could simply have us atop the deeping wall working our way from atop the wall, to the breach, to the hornburg, killing npc's and bosses as we go as the battle rages around us, simple.

But silly. It's a siege. Tight spaces, rows of soldiers against each others. Not a walk through a dungeon to some final chamber or field with a boss. With Epic Battles they actually took care it felt like one, a defensive siege. That was nice of them. And Erebor cluster was already cheap, sh*t content before they even done Battles.

[Hephburz-2]

At the end of the day we can keep talking about the what ifs, the buts, and what happened in the past. First and foremost this is the reality we live in currently which was posted on the very first page of this thread;

Challenging for whom? The encounter would need to be completely redesigned from the ground up, complete with fantastically overpowered buffs to keep the solo player alive and able to contribute to the fight, and it's either going to be a complete cakewalk for everybody or too hard for a percentage of the players who asked for it (for example: Gothmog's Rage, which did have those buffs and still proved much too difficult for a pretty large percentage of the audience, while still managing to be too easy for the rest). The team made a really interesting and challenging battle against Shelob (and friends!), and stripping out all the challenge of that fight feels counterproductive to me: she's Shelob, very high in the pantheon of fantasy's greatest monsters, and she should be TOUGH. I do think there's an audience out there who would absolutely eat up a story-focused raiding video series, if such a thing existed, so you can still see how the story unfolds, but watering down the encounter feels like it de-fangs the experience.

The thing is: I love Shelob. She's a major part of my very favorite section of The Lord of the Rings, and I think Shelob slinking away to an uncertain fate following Sam's heroics is a perfect conclusion to her story. Replacing Samwise the Stout-hearted with the player in a solo instance (even with your favorite Elf buddy nearby to provide sufficient cover for the question of 'How can you stand toe to horrible foot with Shelob?' doesn't make me happy. He faced her alone, and that was significant; the player, no matter how amazing (and you're all pretty amazing!) shouldn't be able to do the same. As a designer, I of course know all the counterarguments ('She was wounded!' 'You've done this before!' 'Just have her run away!' etc. etc.), but I don't find them compelling in this case. The team enjoys making solo versions of smaller group-size instances, but "make a solo raid" feels like a bridge too far. Raiding might not be for you, but then again maybe Shelob is the only villain of sufficient notoriety to get you to try it - and who knows, maybe you'd like it.

MoL

As folk have pointed out: nothing is impossible, and I do know that T1 of the recent raids is intended to be more achievable than the traditional concept of a raid. It does still require wrangling twelve people, of course, which isn't something everyone is going to want to do. I guess my question is: do you want to see Shelob, or do you want to see The Raid Against Shelob In LOTRO? Because we often let you get up close and personal with major level threats (including Shelob!), so you still get to see and interact with them. If you want to see The Raid Against Shelob but you don't want to do it with real people, then that means essentially making a new and basically solo version with all the mechanics that require more than one person stripped out, all the sources of damage reduced, all the difficulty removed -- and after that it's not really the same experience. Do you want a solo instance that takes place in the same location and covers the same story beats, even if it's not the Actual Raid?

I guess what I'm asking is if a Storied Tale that gives you a replacement for the raid experience is the type of thing you want, or if that wouldn't scratch the same itch: because at its heart that wouldn't feel very much like the original raid, even if it covers the same beats.

MoL

And for what it's worth, I would accept a storied tale of X instance and / or raid content only after said content is no longer relevant or the game has moved past that level cap; because, (and now this is the elitism in me coming out - though I think it's more fairness rather than elitsm), the developers have chosen to put the climax of the story in said format for a reason, whether that be an instance or a raid or not, it is done purposefully, and I don't think people who are not willing to put in the same effort as other people to do that group content / raid / whatever it is, like so many other people do, do not deserve to see the resolution of the story at the same time as everyone else. If I am purposefully choosing to boycott X part of the game because I don't like it - which I am right now already with the Delving system, then I do not expect the devs to create a system just for me to get the same loot/experience/resolution as everyone else who is doing the delvings, and that same philosophy applies here. If you don't want to take the same path as everyone else because you refuse to group up or raid, then you should have to wait, it's as simple as that.

[Hephburz-2]

I believe in actual data. Not cause and effect in some player's head or raging quitters on the forum. If they truly saw your version of things in the data and money were going down the drain, why didn't they implement a raid/inni for Pelargil and siege of MT straight away, I wonder...

Because generally game development is planned at least a year or more in advance, and not something they can easily tear up and start over, that's why. Especially when you consider the massive loss in revenue and staff that followed the release of Helms Deep. It obviously got to the point where they realised their new design method was not working and they had to give us back traditional instances, starting with the Osgiliath Cluster at 100 and then so on and so forth.

[TesalionLortus]

The issue was a statement made, that there would be no more raids. It wasn't as if they said that they were using these battles for this update as it would be better suited to the story, and that raids would return in a later update. It was a brutal - No more Raids - ever, kind of statement. The reasoning they offered is that they were too expensive to develop with only 10% of the playerbase using them. There was massive fallout on the boards here about it, but Turbine dug in their heals and more or less set it in stone. Thankfully they reversed it later, but before they did, they took the solo game a step further with West Gondor - where there was absolutely zip for any player to do in a group. Nothing, nada, zero. They went full 180 on grouping, to their own demise. Nobody ever asked for a solo only game. That's not fair for people that enjoy grouping up with others. It failed, which is understandable and the only way it could have gone because the game needs both types of players to fill a playerbase. Level 105 brought Throne, and plenty more group content, alongside plenty of solo content, and that's when things started to get back on track.

I remember that. The constant bickering, the game is dead threads, Turbine is stupid, constant rage, and so on. Part of why I wasn't willing to be active despite lurking from time to time because didn't seem like there was anything interesting ever said here outside of drama (though I suspect due to construction of the forum I tended to miss some more interesting threads, so took a long time to break the ice). And yet we had group content, of different kind, with Epic Battles, warbands, some landscape group content etc, I remember my kin running those all the time, back then I was even more active and was running that kind of group content too from time to time (but I know, people hate different things, "no change!" tends to be in fashion, so they came to the forum and screamed in droves, just because there wasn't a cluster for... quest pack zones). I don't have the right to know any of this because I don't have the data and context, so I'm not coming here saying "this is definitely how SSG earns money" - but my theory is the 10% might have indeed been correct (albeit a bit exaggerated as a statement since not a sole reason why no more raid), the other culprits being the team's willingness to focus on Epic Battles for narrative purposes AND less resources overall due to how things were under Turbine at the time (looking ahead to mobile) AND no more expansions = no more clusters, with overall sentiment that, well, they were nearing conclusion of the game with Pelennor and the Mordor, and didn't even know if they'll get to Mordor with how things stood, so, from devs perspective, no more raids might have been true, at the time. But Epic Battles run their course with MT siege and for Osgiliath they've done innis because a Battle didn't make sense there, and by that time things were already much better and not as gloomy, so they had resources to go back to the regular schedule, meaning bigger updates/expansions with some clusters - though they also optimized for shorter but more, rather than huge large ones.

Any update that is only catering to one type of player is losing revenue. It cuts both ways. The latest update, instances and a future raid only? If that 10% figure that Turbine mentioned was correct, that's 90% lost revenue because people that don't group aren't going to pay for it. Why would they, if they don't play that type of playstyle?

Instances are solo now, which means it does cater to a solo player. (Only raid is problematic on that front. ) And it has some story quests, after all. Not large but seems like good enough because it's well focused rather than pack everything onto it and call it a day in a few instances. Actually, I find them quite fun, surprisingly. They shouldn't have bragged about this reimagined Carn Dun as much because turned out nothing happens in there. Like, theoretically it does, but not really because everything is interiors and can't see a single Dol Guldur tower from inside them, which is all nice for my immersion. Only Bail Avarc exposes me to it, but from far enough, lol. So basically, say, if they ever redesigned/polished original CD somewhat but in line with the OG premise of how the Angmar map actually looks like, with geography and everything, they might as well drop a polished version of a space in Bail Avarc (or clone its NPCs onto a public space) and nothing would feel off. Because those instances might reasonably happen and exist in the old space. CD raid seems to be very faithfully conveyed too, to OG space, so not even that is a problem. Oh well, I guess there is a courtyard there that differs a bit, and that's where the view into all these exterior re-imagination can be found, so that's where it'll vastly differ with the kickass fortifications.

[TesalionLortus]

starting with the Osgiliath Cluster at 100 and then so on and so forth.

Epic battle is literally not suitable for Osgilath. That's all. So of course it was an instance cluster

[Hephburz-2]

Epic battle is literally not suitable for Osgilath. That's all. So of course it was an instance cluster

We can sit here and argue backwards and forwards about what is suitable and what isn't, they could have more than done an instance cluster for Helms Deep, Pelargir and Minas Tirith, more than easily, and I already gave an example of how with Helms Deep (you can disagree all you like, I can disagree back) - it's the simple fact the Epic Battles were clearly much easier to implement and the direction they wanted to take the game at the time - it was meant to be their "new big thing" that was entirely a flop, hence why the system was abandoned and they HAD to return to traditional instances.

They would not give a speech claiming no more expansions and no more instance clusters to then just completely dial back on those statements if what they were doing was working now would they?

[TesalionLortus]

it was meant to be their "new big thing" that was entirely a flop, hence why the system was abandoned and they HAD to return to traditional instances.

Same like boats, which might be their next new big thing thematically tied to next big content. Battles were new things thematically tied to... battles. Also, it's hilarious hearing they were easy to implement... all these army imposters and bending the engine (at the time) to make it work was sure "easy". Easy would be having instances as always but maybe noticeably smaller or even just use a skirm

If I am purposefully choosing to boycott X part of the game because I don't like it - which I am right now already with the Delving system, then I do not expect the devs to create a system just for me to get the same loot/experience/resolution as everyone else who is doing the delvings, and that same philosophy applies here. If you don't want to take the same path as everyone else because you refuse to group up or raid, then you should have to wait, it's as simple as that.

Funny. Delvings are basically repeatable missions, you don't miss a thing by boycotting them. Boycotting raids equals missing out on important climaxes and key knowledge of the story.

[Hephburz-2]

Same like boats, which might be their next new big thing thematically tied to next big content. Battles were new things thematically tied to... battles. Also, it's hilarious hearing they were easy to implement... all these army imposters and bending the engine (at the time) to make it work was sure "easy". Easy would be having instances as always or even use a skirm

Easy to implement meaning, because that was the direction they were taking the game - Big Battles are more than certainly modelled on Skirmishes and instances that already exist, like, the Battle for Lorien as an example, the tech and premise already existed they just took it a step further.

Funny. Delvings are basically repeatable missions, you don't miss a thing by boycotting them. Boycotting raids equals missing out on important climaxes and key knowledge of the story.

Yes. I never did missions either, and the same philosophy still applies - and according to "you" I don't miss a thing boycotting them - I miss everything they encompass, from the small story they tell, the loot they reward to the player experience of doing them, AND YET I still don't expect SSG to make a whole new system just for me to experience, or get the same loot as everyone else who is doing the Missions/Delvings. I accept that these things exist and if I want to experience them, I must play them the same as everyone else.

[TesalionLortus]

I miss everything they encompass, from the small story they tell, the loot they reward to the player experience of doing them, AND YET I still don't expect SSG to make a whole new system just for me to experience, or get the same loot as everyone else who is doing the Missions/Delvings.

I'm sorry to tell you this but you can basically learn their story by reading a bestowal quest and then... just close the window. : D Loot, sure, but that's fluff, not everyone is privilaged to obtain every single item in the game on a silver platter. But that's acceptable. Loot doesn't equal the game's storyline, one of the major factors why we're still here on our journey with this game in the first place

[Hephburz-2]

Loot doesn't equal the game's storyline, one of the major factors why we're still here on our journey with this game in the first place

For you perhaps. I'm here for two reasons; the age old time sunk fallacy, have played for too long, dedicated too much time, and spent too much money to just quit now, and secondly, because of the people I play with. The story, is simply an extra at this point, not to say that I don't enjoy it, it's just not the thing keeping me here.

[TobiasEstForte]

And you know all of this with such business revenue convictions how? You have access to all the data of SSG?

I'm struggling to find it, but a graph exists showing player numbers since game release. HUGE drop off at lvl 95 cap.
_____________

I don't get the no time to raid argument. T1 HH with the current gearing stage must take like 15 minutes by now. Dialogue/immunity stages limiting it to lower. If you really can't find 15 minutes of uninterrupted gaming because there are more important, pressing things perhaps there are more important, pressing things to care about than having your character complete a story solo? I feel like there's a cognitive dissonance here.

[Neinda]

I'm struggling to find it, but a graph exists showing player numbers since game release. HUGE drop off at lvl 95 cap.
_____________

I don't get the no time to raid argument. T1 HH with the current gearing stage must take like 15 minutes by now. Dialogue/immunity stages limiting it to lower. If you really can't find 15 minutes of uninterrupted gaming because there are more important, pressing things perhaps there are more important, pressing things to care about than having your character complete a story solo? I feel like there's a cognitive dissonance here.

T1 HH is all good for now. But that is level cap. What about my level 65 starting the In Their Absence quest chain? OD full run is a time sink. This is at the same time as trying to find groups to run the Mirkwood instance cluster. Then before you know it, level 75 Orthanc and Draigoch. The Erebor quest chain is a non starter for me because I know full well the number of people willing to run Fires of Smaug is probably single digits at best. I also have a level 130 that has not run Anvil or Remm. I have a 120 that is still working on the quest chain for Anvil and has never run Abyss. I have run all of that on my old main but would be nice finish the quest chains on the others rather than deleting the quests. The problem is not the current level cap content. The problem is when the current level cap content is no longer relevant. I would think that when SSG upgrades the levels and starts a new area, they could add a quest to the old content to allow people to finish the quest chains and move on without having to delete the quests. For me the story is no big deal because I have been there, done that. I know that I should ignore many of the raid quests starting in Moria because finding a group interested enough to run those things is not reality. Yes, many of those I could get someone to speed run me for quest completion but why bother at that point. Think about the people who have not been there yet. How do they get this done and actually get to finish the stories? Some of these instances can find groups during the anniversary event because many people are running them for that but I just feel that the older content needs a bit of love and attention before they toss it to the curb like trash. There is a lot of wonderful old content in this game that has been tossed aside and ignored. This is what new people to the game see. Old content that few people run and quest chains that lead to story line dead ends because of the way the quests and stories are structured.

Raids and group content help make this a better game but once they are old they become roadblocks to new players who follow the story lines. This could be fixed easily in any number of ways. At a minimum it could be something SSG does going forward.

And, since no one ever said get rid of raids, the reasons people left in the past are completely unrelated to wanting to be able to follow story lines and finish quest chains in the game. Unless you want to track how many people get frustrated during the leveling process when forced to skip the end of the story lines on a regular basis.