Celtic Heroes

A lock group consists of 8 toons. It doesnt matter if the secondary clan brings 10 toons and the dominant clan 30 toons, its 8 vs 8. It mostly comes down to fast reflexes. Another advantage secondary clans have is the level lock advantage.

To an extent I guess you could say it is 8v8 but if the dom clan has a set time of when to prepare more 8s then there are more chances to lock against the second clan.

True a shorter window would allow the smaller clan to prepare their 8 more effectively but then the larger clan with more resources and toons can do the same.

Consider it this way. Imagine it is a game of chess. One player is very skilled, the other less so but learning.
In lets say 99% of cases the higher skilled player will win unless they themselves make a mistake.
But if we add a little bit of randomness to the game we give further chances to the new player.
We create opportunities.

Now there is a debate on if that randomness is effective and if it has an impact in the game but currently we do have data to support the windows implementation.

No offence but thats not a good comparison, doesnt even look like the situation.

Lets take your chess example again. We have the very skilled chess player and the less skilled chess player.

You guys have as solution to increase the time they each get to think about their next move. Both their concentration gets depleted. It doesn't create randomness, both players eventually get tired of the game, and the skilled player will still win due to having more experience, taking less concentration per move thus can play longer without making mistakes.

Then opposed to that you could shorten the play time, so that both parties have to excel in a relative short timewindow. Lets compare this to a chess game as speed chess. Even an experienced player is more likely to make mistakes when they dont have enough time to prepare.

Completely agree with this example.

OTM are greatly underestimating the lesser dominant clan. If the lesser dominant clan wants any chance at progressing they would need to match the more dominant clan, thus they begin camping these raids for several hours.

No offence but thats not a good comparison, doesnt even look like the situation.

Lets take your chess example again. We have the very skilled chess player and the less skilled chess player.

You guys have as solution to increase the time they each get to think about their next move. Both their concentration gets depleted. It doesn't create randomness, both players eventually get tired of the game, and the skilled player will still win due to having more experience, taking less concentration per move thus can play longer without making mistakes.

Then opposed to that you could shorten the play time, so that both parties have to excel in a relative short timewindow. Lets compare this to a chess game as speed chess. Even an experienced player is more likely to make mistakes when they dont have enough time to prepare.

The solution is not "increase the time they each get to think about their next move" as I said we are increasing the chance for "randomness".

The more randomness you introduce to a system the more chances the "less skilled" player has. Randomness is more, the skilled player having less pieces.

We are not providing more time to create a solution, we are providing time to create chances.

And we HAVE received some complaints about bosses that were moved to shorter windows being monopolized, though again only from specific servers

The article I linked has a really good in depth view on this example.

Honestly I would say that the longer spawn windows give dominant clans a larger margin of error. For instance, like I said before, sometimes my clan will come to a boss with a group of 5 or so people exactly on time and then a minute or two later, the bigger clan will start to show up in droves. If the boss had spawned when it was exactly due, we could have gotten because we were precise and had the timer down pat. However, because of the way things are, the other clan can get when they have a ton of their people show up.

Honestly I would say that the longer spawn windows give dominant clans a larger margin of error. For instance, like I said before, sometimes my clan will come to a boss with a group of 5 or so people exactly on time and then a minute or two later, the bigger clan will start to show up in droves. If the boss had spawned when it was exactly due, we could have gotten because we were precise and had the timer down pat. However, because of the way things are, the other clan can get when they have a ton of their people show up.

A reason the top clan is the top clan on server comes with better dps and more people.

So if you both have your best dps there at the same time either way you won't win because their Dps is better and will continue to make the gap in dps quality bigger as they get more bosses. But most clans have a active and inactive periods throughout the day so maybe the top and lesser clans active times are different. So when a raid spawns In a lesser clan is more active, they have a higher probability of winning as they can more people to log where as at times in the inactive period of the day even top clans can get 3-4 people max on.

Honestly I would say that the longer spawn windows give dominant clans a larger margin of error. For instance, like I said before, sometimes my clan will come to a boss with a group of 5 or so people exactly on time and then a minute or two later, the bigger clan will start to show up in droves. If the boss had spawned when it was exactly due, we could have gotten because we were precise and had the timer down pat. However, because of the way things are, the other clan can get when they have a ton of their people show up.

A reason the top clan is the top clan on server comes with better dps and more people.

So if you both have your best dps there at the same time either way you won't win because their Dps is better and will continue to make the gap in dps quality bigger as they get more bosses. But most clans have a active and inactive periods throughout the day so maybe the top and lesser clans active times are different. So when a raid spawns In a lesser clan is more active, they have a higher probability of winning as they can more people to log where as at times in the inactive period of the day even top clans can get 3-4 people max on.

You missed my point. If the boss spawned a few minutes before(when it was first due and when the dominant clan was not there yet), the less dominant clan would have because obviously a few minutes is enough time to lock it.

Just fyi, I personally am not talking about gelebron. As you can tell by my level I have had no experience with Gelebron. I'm just talking about spawn windows in general, and in general in my experience as a member of a lesser clan, longer spawn windows are not beneficial to us.

No offence but thats not a good comparison, doesnt even look like the situation.

Lets take your chess example again. We have the very skilled chess player and the less skilled chess player.

You guys have as solution to increase the time they each get to think about their next move. Both their concentration gets depleted. It doesn't create randomness, both players eventually get tired of the game, and the skilled player will still win due to having more experience, taking less concentration per move thus can play longer without making mistakes.

Then opposed to that you could shorten the play time, so that both parties have to excel in a relative short timewindow. Lets compare this to a chess game as speed chess. Even an experienced player is more likely to make mistakes when they dont have enough time to prepare.

The solution is not "increase the time they each get to think about their next move" as I said we are increasing the chance for "randomness".

The more randomness you introduce to a system the more chances the "less skilled" player has. Randomness is more, the skilled player having less pieces.

We are not providing more time to create a solution, we are providing time to create chances.

And we HAVE received some complaints about bosses that were moved to shorter windows being monopolized, though again only from specific servers

The article I linked has a really good in depth view on this example.

So I just read the article and it was quite interesting, but I think I interpreted the article different than you do,

It might seem crazy what I am about to say, but there are several reasons for games to use chance as a game mechanic:

1.The game designer wants to prevent or delay the player from solving the game.
2.The game designer wants the gameplay to be balanced and competitive for all different kinds of players.
3. Chance can increase the variety of elements in your game system.
4. Chance can help you create dramatic moments in your game.
5. Chance can enhance the decision-making in your game.

So this part in the article summed up why developers might want to use chance. I especially would like to discuss the 5th reason. The first 4 reasons can be applied from mighty-godly tiered drops to lock battles.

Reason 5 implies that chance can enhance the decision making in your game. Long spawn windows defnitely do not 'enhance' the decision making, it's harder for every party to schedule raids, it bores the player to death. Also, it does not increase the 'chance' of a secondary clan getting the lock over a dominant clan. The dominant clan has more members at its disposal to camp so can camp around the clock on contrary to the secondary clan. So it only broadens the gap.

Adams and Rollings describe a balanced game as “fair to the player or players, […] neither too easy nor too hard, and makes the skill of the player the most important factor in determining his success.” A game that is considered well-balanced, therefore, has the following characteristics:

1. The game provides meaningful choices. Several strategies can allow the player to win. There is no dominant winning strategy in the game.
2. Chance does not play a role so great that player skill is irrelevant. A player with more skill should be more successful than a poor player.
3.The game’s level of difficulty should be consistent. The players perceive the challenges in the game as not abrupt and within a reasonable range of their abilities.

So this was a part in the article about how much chance there should be in a game. Where lies the balance, should it be all luck or should skilled player always get the win. How I read these 3 rules is as follows:
1. There are several ways to get to the top of the game. I suppose this means you can solo level to end game and farm dl/edl drops of phs, its harder but possible.
2. A player or clan with more skill should be able to win over a weaker clan. I think he even implies that if there is a dominant clan, they should be able to monopolise that boss, because they deserve that because they are more skilled( I am not saying I agree with this). The only requirement is that this monopolisation shouldn't obstruct the rest of the player base from progressing.
3. I think this applies to several layers of the game at the moment. An example( that has nothing to do with this topic) are the arcane bounties. The difficulty of the arcane bounties lies beyond players abilites, so they are forced to group or lix for a very small reward.

In Player-vs-player games, the following characteristics also apply:

1. The players perceive the game as fair.
2. Any player, who falls behind early in the game, gets some opportunity to catch up before the end of the game.
3. The game seldom or never results in a stalemate if the players are of unequal ability.

1. the first reason is very subjective. I believe the game is quite fair, if you are capable enough to socialise you can always find someone willing to help you. This can be from just a few friends to a big clan.
2. Half a year ago I would have said no, this game does not provide that opportunity, but the recent xp quests for the lower levels are giving new players that opportunity to catch up. Legacy bosses and the legacy lux shop also give players a chance to get old lux and jewellery.
3. This game very much results in a stalemate. Bottlenecks are the biggest problem in my opinion. At least in lugh(but I am sure this happens in every server), mordy,necro and hrung still get farmed, because their loot still isn't obsolete. New bosses that actually drop way better gear that ex end game bosses would solve the problem.

When balancing games, an important factor to consider is the balance of skill and luck elements in the games. Some of the following are signs indicating that your skill/luck balance might be off:

1. Your players are bored. This is generally a sign of missing interesting decisions in the game and too many luck elements.
2. Your players are only bored when it is not their turn. Your game is likely lacking some strategic elements as none of the things players do during their turn seem to affect other players’ turns.
3. Your players do not become engaged in the game and are confused about what to do. This could be a sign of too many decisions or too much information to process for players.
4. One of your players beats all the other players by a wide margin. This could be an indicator that your game is heavily skill-based and one player has mastered this skill. To keep a game balanced for players with different skill levels, it is important to add some elements of luck to it.

1. This is defenitely happening in the game at the moment. The mighty-godly tiered loot is a perfect example of this.
2. I think this reason applies more to apple and board games so I will ignore this for now
3. Dont think this applies either to ch
4. This can be compared to a dominant clan in a server I guess. Although I dont consider having the most people available when a boss is due skillfull.

Then the last interesting thing I found that could be related to ch was:

Chance can make games more fun, because it adds elements of uncertainty to it. Uncertainty equal surprises for players and humans do enjoy surprises.

Chance is good to be added as long as players enjoy it. Bottom line I think this article tried to say that you should find a balance of luck/chance. Just adding chance/luck so other people can have a shot at a boss is not the solution. Making those players moving on from the boss should be the priority, not to make it harder to even spot one.

So this was my interpretation of this article. Please prove me wrong.

A dominant clans probability at winning lock is in no way increased by them having less time to create more groups all they need is one group which is better geared than the lesser clans group, which it is due to dominant clans being dominant.
To buck the trend of wildly inappropriate analogies, if I were cutting a stone with huge petrol powered stone cutter and racing someone using a hammer and chisel would the likely hood of me winning be increased by me having a couple of friends cutting stones with petrol powered stone cutters too?
Of course it wouldn't, with or without the others I would always finish first.

Regarding Muldar's link about randomness and fairness in game developing; If OTM believe randomness would create fairness why is there a spawn window which can be timed to allow camping in the first place, why are all bosses not completely random?

So I just read the article and it was quite interesting, but I think I interpreted the article different than you do,

It might seem crazy what I am about to say, but there are several reasons for games to use chance as a game mechanic:

1.The game designer wants to prevent or delay the player from solving the game.
2.The game designer wants the gameplay to be balanced and competitive for all different kinds of players.
3. Chance can increase the variety of elements in your game system.
4. Chance can help you create dramatic moments in your game.
5. Chance can enhance the decision-making in your game.

So this part in the article summed up why developers might want to use chance. I especially would like to discuss the 5th reason. The first 4 reasons can be applied from mighty-godly tiered drops to lock battles.

Reason 5 implies that chance can enhance the decision making in your game. Long spawn windows defnitely do not 'enhance' the decision making, it's harder for every party to schedule raids, it bores the player to death. Also, it does not increase the 'chance' of a secondary clan getting the lock over a dominant clan. The dominant clan has more members at its disposal to camp so can camp around the clock on contrary to the secondary clan. So it only broadens the gap.

While it is great you read through the article and extracted several points from the article itself, it was only provided to give a brief overview of chance and randomness in games, it was in no way meant to be taken as a blue print for the Design within Celtic Heroes. Nevertheless I will address some of the points you raised.

Firstly would be the conclusion that point 5 "Chance can enhance the decision-making in your game." is related to spawn windows.
The author was simply providing examples of why designers may use chance within the broad spectrum of game types (As you have mentioned later in your post many of his examples relate to board games rather than video).
As I have said in my previous posts windows would have a greater relation to point 2 "The game designer wants the gameplay to be balanced and competitive for all different kinds of players."
I have discussed how randomness and chance allow opportunities for "less skilled players".
While you are welcome to disagree with that statement it is a common game design statement and the basis for the article.

To be honest there are no other points to be raised, most of your post is just analyzing the article and comparing it to Celtic Heroes which is understandable. I agree with you on many points.

Chance is good to be added as long as players enjoy it. Bottom line I think this article tried to say that you should find a balance of luck/chance. Just adding chance/luck so other people can have a shot at a boss is not the solution. Making those players moving on from the boss should be the priority, not to make it harder to even spot one.

So this was my interpretation of this article. Please prove me wrong.

I agree on your point of it is all about finding "a balance of luck/chance" that is what we try to strike with spawn windows. I myself do believe there is argument for lowering them further on many bosses and I would like to remind we have made changes previously.

On "moving on from the boss should be the priority" I agree but would like to raise the point many times clans move on to later return and stifle competition. There may always be a "moving on boss" that never gets moved from which we have seen examples of from our data.

I would also like to address this:

Please prove me wrong.

I'm not here to prove anyone wrong. I am here to provide a direct link to OTM and foster discussions.
If the answers I give from the team are disliked, well that is an unfortunate aspect of my job.
The forums are not here for people to score imaginary argument points over other players or devs.
This is not so much directed at you but just a general post for some behavior I have seen on the forum now and again.

Overall good post I think you analyzed the article pretty well.

Regarding Muldar's link about randomness and fairness in game developing; If OTM believe randomness would create fairness why is there a spawn window which can be timed to allow camping in the first place, why are all bosses not completely random?

That would remove the skill aspect (to a large degree) as discussed in the article.

(Also probably technical limitations)

Okay maybe technical limitations but I don't see how it would remove the 'skill' aspect, surely it would change the skill aspect from being available to camp and having better gear to actually finding a boss at random and being able to organise a quick kill before others take it.