Celtic Heroes

The Official Forum for Celtic Heroes, the 3D MMORPG for iOS and Android Devices

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#82
Since we can't stay on topic here.. (Which is not social dissorders I don't see any psychiatrists here that ik of) how bout this otm make a vote simple yes or no on the actual topic here yes or no majority wins no comments no fake doctors diagnosing ppl and no bs easy and simple
What could have been a great discussion and ideas to improve the lock and aggro issues has turned into clans bickering with each other. This is mainly due to people thinking they are more deserving of others,entitlement, and other selfishness.

The solution isn't penalizing players that want to lvl. The solution isn't making a 170 tank more sufficient than a 220 tank. The strongest group should win the outcome. But a stronger group shouldn't stop a lower leveled group from obtaining gear when the stronger group doesn't need it. The saddest most selfish thing I've read on here is groups admitting to preventing others on purpose of getting gear just because they didn't want them geared.

But we can't come to a sensible discussion because people from Jim Bob's clan wants to fight with Johnny Dan's clan. Well done.
^This has come to me as an important point made by Zyz. It doesn't take an expert to notice such unrest in this social aspect of the game. I am even ashamed of noting this as this point is completely true and I'm bringing it up again for you to see where I'm getting at. The only thing I ask of you now is to take note of this unrest and be the Chieftain that you are and act appropriately. Bring the peace to everyone. Don't take down another for the better of yourself. Allow your members to group us at the bosses they need and let us get the items we need in order to progress.
Pavillion. Arawn.

TheOath Family.

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#83
Speaking as an unbiased (clanwise) outside individual, it is wrong that if two clans are at a boss who need the drops (i.e. Dl bosses) or at a loot boss with gear useful to the higher levels (i.e. Hru) the higher leveled group should not be at a disadvantage in gaining items they need simply because they are a higher level. It is punishing people for playing the game to the "end"


Just as an example, a new player joins the game, plaus clanleas untill they are 200, looks to join anclan and when they do they need to be geared. Their clan now has to go up against lower levels who are going to outlock them when they need the drops too
This comment was just a perfect example to show that this lvl based lock is pointless and rather harmful.

@Pav, I think u dont get the most basic idea of this topic, yes, both dominant clan and their rival clans should enjoy all aspects of the game, but only if they put the same amount of effort.
The dominant clan is dominant because it worked hard to be that way, the rival clans these days barely work half as hard and simply get everything handed to them due easier lvl lock for example. Back at the day we had dominant and rival clans without this lock system, and they didnt complain about it, each clan knew that the more effort he'll put into it the stronger it'll become, while the lvl based lock system encourages putting less effort and still get even more rewarded.

Explain me the logic in less effort = bigger rewards, explain me the logic of lvl 220 not standing a chance vs a lvl 180, 40 lvls of difference, when the lvl 220 put a lot more effort in his character, worked harder and did much more, and the 180 just stopped lvling at 180 because he knew it'll give him the advantage.
If there is some common sense in it, maybe the argument in favor of target lock would be valid, but just like u expect the dominant clan to imagine being in ur shoes, trying doing the same, work harder than ur rivals and have less chances to win, then we'll see if ur still happy about 'fair' chance for everyone.


Its not Free-For-All if a certain group gets favored.
And these are the two best points I've seen so far.. And guess what they ain't on my server or in my clan. Again it's about the game as a whole all endgame clans and servers and being fair to all players not just ones who sit idolly and rely on target lock for extremly important bosses.

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#84
Just so u know, Ive been in much weaker clans and felt what is it to be on the rival clan, as a low lvl out of jealousy and having MarcusD as my chief Id hate the clan Im at now, but Ive lvled and went into stronger clans, and being back at the day in LivingLegends vs the clan Im at now (Elementals), there was nothing wrong in being a weaker rival clan, we lost? We worked harder, we lost again? We worked harder, we didnt get to kill Aggy but when I joined Elementals they killed Aggy as well and back then we gratsed them and were actually happy because that was FAIR and FRIENDLY competition. This kind of thing never happens today.
#NerfMages #AvoidBalance #WhyPlayARogue #MeatShieldOnly #HealingSlavesOnly

OP dps warrior on Belenus, hot af melee druid on Nuada. #Elementals #Apex

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#85
Then I would like to ask of you higher-levelled players this: what becomes of us?
I only wish to progress and it seems as though the many points made were focusing on degrading another. I get that many high level players would like to take on lower leveled bosses. But what about us, the lower leveled players who would also like to take down those bosses? This is why I bring up the possible solution of social reform. Take down our mindsets of 'outlocking' and think more towards achieving the same goal of progress. If you simply don't need the boss then let a newer wave of players to take your place so that they can play the game fully. I know Pigman's point is understandingly appealing. But you must take note of what I wish to be the solution or at least the possible solution. "Letting weaker players win endgame bosses" as the title of this thread exactly portrays this mindset of having to defeat and conquer. This means there isn't necessarily a benefit for these high-levelled players. Sure, you can count a massive clan bank as a benefit. But if you truly expect to take on these lower levelled bosses than you should only expect newer members who can lock these bosses...or...open up and forget outlocking and start reforming. Start working together on what we need.
Last edited by Pavillion on Fri Jul 03, 2015 10:00 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Pavillion. Arawn.

TheOath Family.

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#86
Exactly my point criminal if it was a fair system then great good for u. U won a lock battle with no handicap. At the higher level bosses people should supply best dps to win u can work and strive for it that's fairness not what we have now. Where the higher level u are u get punished for playing game to the fullest that's the point of this thread not social dissorders :roll:

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#87
Speaking as an unbiased (clanwise) outside individual, it is wrong that if two clans are at a boss who need the drops (i.e. Dl bosses) or at a loot boss with gear useful to the higher levels (i.e. Hru) the higher leveled group should not be at a disadvantage in gaining items they need simply because they are a higher level. It is punishing people for playing the game to the "end"


Just as an example, a new player joins the game, plaus clanleas untill they are 200, looks to join anclan and when they do they need to be geared. Their clan now has to go up against lower levels who are going to outlock them when they need the drops too
This comment was just a perfect example to show that this lvl based lock is pointless and rather harmful.

@Pav, I think u dont get the most basic idea of this topic, yes, both dominant clan and their rival clans should enjoy all aspects of the game, but only if they put the same amount of effort.
The dominant clan is dominant because it worked hard to be that way, the rival clans these days barely work half as hard and simply get everything handed to them due easier lvl lock for example. Back at the day we had dominant and rival clans without this lock system, and they didnt complain about it, each clan knew that the more effort he'll put into it the stronger it'll become, while the lvl based lock system encourages putting less effort and still get even more rewarded.

Explain me the logic in less effort = bigger rewards, explain me the logic of lvl 220 not standing a chance vs a lvl 180, 40 lvls of difference, when the lvl 220 put a lot more effort in his character, worked harder and did much more, and the 180 just stopped lvling at 180 because he knew it'll give him the advantage.
If there is some common sense in it, maybe the argument in favor of target lock would be valid, but just like u expect the dominant clan to imagine being in ur shoes, trying doing the same, work harder than ur rivals and have less chances to win, then we'll see if ur still happy about 'fair' chance for everyone.


Its not Free-For-All if a certain group gets favored.
All of this is bout the most perfect thing I have ever seen on the forums.

I don't care what world or clan anyone is in...in the real world if I stopped dong my job at a certain point I would not expect to get raises or promotions that the person who works hard and pushes beyond gets.
Thyra 204 rogue (Rosmerta)

Faolan Wariche 224 warrior (Arawn retired)

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#88
Then I would like to ask of you higher-levelled players this: what becomes of us?
I only wish to progress and it seems as though the many points made were focusing on degrading another. I get that many high level players would like to take on lower leveled bosses. But what about us, the lower leveled players who would also like to take down those bosses? This is why I bring up the possible solution of social reform. Take down our mindsets of 'outlocking' and think more towards achieving a goal. If you simply don't need the boss then let a newer wave of players to take your place so that they can play the game fully. I know Pigman's point is understandingly appealing. But you must take note of what I wish to be the solution or at least the possible solution. "Letting weaker players win endgame bosses" as the title of this thread exactly portrays this mindset of having to defeat and conquer. This means there isn't necessarily a benefit for these high-levelled players. Sure, you can count a massive clan bank as a benefit. But if you truly expect to take on these lower levelled bosses than you should only expect newer members who can lock these bosses.
Go level get more dps u can make a 8 person lock group

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#89
if everything is based on how much work we've done in game why am I not allowed to get gear? I've spent 28 months playing over 8 hours a day, leveled 4 characters over 170, camped and killed bosses all day long for 3 clans through the games history, led 2 clans, was the main record keeper for eg drops for over 5 months in the largest clan in arawn at the time, and farmed millions in gold and reinvested in my characters for event lux and lixes. I also spend 16 hours a day of camping dl while quadboxing anything that spawns and waking up at night for boss calls.

Level alone does not show how much time or effort someone has put into the game. My clan works hard, every single one of us. Why are we then subject to penalization under the guise that we haven't invested enough into our characters just because we're not 220+?

Re: Letting weaker players win endgame bosses

#90
Speaking as an unbiased (clanwise) outside individual, it is wrong that if two clans are at a boss who need the drops (i.e. Dl bosses) or at a loot boss with gear useful to the higher levels (i.e. Hru) the higher leveled group should not be at a disadvantage in gaining items they need simply because they are a higher level. It is punishing people for playing the game to the "end"


Just as an example, a new player joins the game, plaus clanleas untill they are 200, looks to join anclan and when they do they need to be geared. Their clan now has to go up against lower levels who are going to outlock them when they need the drops too
This comment was just a perfect example to show that this lvl based lock is pointless and rather harmful.

@Pav, I think u dont get the most basic idea of this topic, yes, both dominant clan and their rival clans should enjoy all aspects of the game, but only if they put the same amount of effort.
The dominant clan is dominant because it worked hard to be that way, the rival clans these days barely work half as hard and simply get everything handed to them due easier lvl lock for example. Back at the day we had dominant and rival clans without this lock system, and they didnt complain about it, each clan knew that the more effort he'll put into it the stronger it'll become, while the lvl based lock system encourages putting less effort and still get even more rewarded.

Explain me the logic in less effort = bigger rewards, explain me the logic of lvl 220 not standing a chance vs a lvl 180, 40 lvls of difference, when the lvl 220 put a lot more effort in his character, worked harder and did much more, and the 180 just stopped lvling at 180 because he knew it'll give him the advantage.
If there is some common sense in it, maybe the argument in favor of target lock would be valid, but just like u expect the dominant clan to imagine being in ur shoes, trying doing the same, work harder than ur rivals and have less chances to win, then we'll see if ur still happy about 'fair' chance for everyone.


Its not Free-For-All if a certain group gets favored.
All of this is bout the most perfect thing I have ever seen on the forums.

I don't care what world or clan anyone is in...in the real world if I stopped dong my job at a certain point I would not expect to get raises or promotions that the person who works hard and pushes beyond gets.
+100000000

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests