Why reaper shouldn't have xp, imho

[Vanhooger]

I can see after a week how things evolve and played a lot of reaper myself.

First few day most people wanted to try on theyre maxed out toon but once they realized that xp s***k and quest take too long, they started looking at how to maximize xp, and the answer is TR.

Now, as I said many time I do not care about reaper XP but, most people does, so doing a party at cap is nearly impossible as reaper xp give another big plus to the TR system and another big minus on staying at cap.

I can come up with quick example from last night:

R10 madstone, sent tell to many people but many wouldn't join as with lvl 30 the xp is so low that isn't worth the time for them.

Took us 88 min to run Madstone r10 for a 90xp, while a guildmate did last quest of catacombs and got 240 xp in 40 sec.
Also, I did a r10 memoirs for 900 xp in 36 min...when you can easily TR and get 900xp in 5 min on lower skull.

Xp should scale better with skull and length of the quest or finding someone who want to join a party at lvl 30 is insanely hard.

Reaper shouldn't be about xp but have fun and challenge, but I guess it's too late.

So xp is here to stay, at least reward who is trying harder skull & longer quest.

[Skunkhunt42]

Level lockout and xp penalties at least for epic quests are a big fail in this terrible reaper system.

[Zoriaan]

Absolutely agree!!
They need to do something...but this current xp system for lvl 30 toons parked at cap who are only interested in high skull stuff is complete and utter fail!!

[KingNite]

I can see after a week how things evolve and played a lot of reaper myself.

First few day most people wanted to try on theyre maxed out toon but once they realized that xp s***k and quest take too long, they started looking at how to maximize xp, and the answer is TR.

Now, as I said many time I do not care about reaper XP but, most people does, so doing a party at cap is nearly impossible as reaper xp give another big plus to the TR system and another big minus on staying at cap.

I can come up with quick example from last night:

R10 madstone, sent tell to many people but many wouldn't join as with lvl 30 the xp is so low that isn't worth the time for them.

Took us 88 min to run Madstone r10 for a 90xp, while a guildmate did last quest of catacombs and got 240 xp in 40 sec.
Also, I did a r10 memoirs for 900 xp in 36 min...when you can easily TR and get 900xp in 5 min on lower skull.

Xp should scale better with skull and length of the quest or finding someone who want to join a party at lvl 30 is insanely hard.

Reaper shouldn't be about xp but have fun and challenge, but I guess it's too late.

So xp is here to stay, at least reward who is trying harder skull & longer quest.

I agree with the diagnostic, I understand your concerns. But I think you fail in identifying where the true problem is. It is that most people (almost everyone) when given the opportunity to choose in between challenge or XP efficiency prefer the second. And you can't have both because something challenging and difficult will always require more time and resources and is, in general, less efficent. That has always happened and will always happen unless you remove any kind of reward, which, as you already know, will never happen either, because rewards, as you have seen in just 1 week of reaper, is what "interests" people the most.

Just find some like minded players who are interested in challenge and no rewards. I know it's hard with the current population but if you can't, maybe you just need to accept that there is not enough people interested on it and move on, either to another game or TR, like almost everyone will do. This game is strongly based on the TR system so they need to reward it in some way to give people reasons to TR.

Some of your examples and conclusions also are a bit missleading.

XP already scales with skulls, 10 skulls gives way more XP than 1 skull on any quest. XP scaling with time completion has never been balanced, you can do Spies in 5 minutes on EN for almost 100k XP or Madstone EE in 20-30 minutes for 70k XP. EN and EH have always been more time efficient than EE although EE gives more XP, that's why everyone did his daily XP runs on EN/EH.

Took us 88 min to run Madstone r10 for a 90xp, while a guildmate did last quest of catacombs and got 240 xp in 40 sec. --> Did your gildmate run catacombs 6 levels over the quest base level like you did in madstone? Or did he run it at level? Whas he getting first time bonus?

Also, I did a r10 memoirs for 900 xp in 36 min...when you can easily TR and get 900xp in 5 min on lower skull. --> If r10 gives 900 XP, lower skull should pay less not the same. If its paying the same is because of first time bonus after TR. If you do r10 with first time bonus it will pay more than 900 XP. First time bonus and repetition penalty are to prevent people farming the same good Xp/min quest over and over and encourage running all quests at least once every TR, which IMO is a good thing. Better than seeing the same 3 quests being run over and over by level 30 toons for fast XP which is what would happen with no first time bonus and repetition penalty and no over level penalty.

[Renvar]

Can we have a discussion about Reaper flaws without having to label it an utter fail, a big fail, or a complete disaster?

It's like reading a bunch of Donald Trump tweets lately.

The problem with Reaper XP is the following:

A) The Reaper XP decay starts at BASE quest level +1. Hard Difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +1. Elite difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +2. Regular Quest XP decay starts starts at EFFECTIVE quest level +2. Thus, the following is true:

Proof is in the Poision: Base Quest Level - 4

Effective Quest Level on Norm: 4.
Effective Quest Level on Hard: 5
Effective Quest Level on Elite: 6
Effective Quest level on Reaper: 6 (shares with Elite)

A Level 4 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper based on Skulls.

A Level 5 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls.

A Level 6 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Hard.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -20% penalty.

A Level 7 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -25% penalty.
Quest XP on Hard with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Elite.
Full Quest XP on Reaper.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -50% penalty.

The "sweet" spot for most players was running this quest with characters between levels 4-6. As those gave the full BB and full quest XP. Now, with Reaper, the best range is 4-5. You have shrank the level range for pretty much every LFM. All across the board. And running it with a character one level above the elite effective quest level (7 in this case) would still net you full quest XP, just no BB. However, your Reaper XP loss is a whopping -50%. Some players would run stuff 1 level over like that because there was too much content at a particular level range and they were level capped and had to take a level. Losing BB wasn't that big a deal for a few quests because you still get full quest XP and there is more than enough XP in the game to level a TR or ER to cap. With no problem. BUT, now, when you need somewhere around 5-24 million Reaper XP and you are getting it in 200-800 xp chunks (at best) there is not NEARLY enough XP. So giving up 50% of it on a quest is unpleasant.

The fix for this part is as follows:

The XP penalty for reaper should be synced with Quest XP penalties and work off of Effective Quest Level, not Base Quest Level. And the curve should follow the Quest XP curve: -10, -25, -50, -75, -99. It still tops out after 6 levels over effective quest level. That would release the constriction on grouping that has occurred in the first week. Cutting off one or two levels from LFM's may seem like a minor thing, but it definitely makes grouping much more difficult. When you get into Epics, the issue is even more pronounced, since people are used to BB an addtional two levels. Now that is all gone. LFM's for a level 21 quest used to be 20-25. Now they can only be 20-22. That 3 levels cuts out a lot of players you might want to run with. Limiting grouping like this is mistake, in my opinion.

B) The other issue with Reaper XP is that it seems to be completely ignoring the length of the dungeon, the base level of the dungeon, or the challenge of the dungeon. I can get just as much XP from a 5 skull Kobold's ringleader in 3 minutes as I can from a 5 skull Von3 in 40 minutes or a 5 skull Haunted Halls in an hour. The Quest XP on epic dungeons is at least triple, if not quadruple, the quest XP in heroic dungeons. The Reaper XP does not have this same multiplication. As a result, heroic dungeons are BY FAR AND AWAY a better method for earning Reaper XP. Because they are significantly faster and easier, even on 5 skulls. This has the, I hope, unintended consequence of incentivizing heroic TR'ing. It makes Iconics less appealing by far (or buying Iconic Hearts, LR +1 Hearts, etc), It makes Epic Reincarnations (and buying ER hearts) less appealing, it makes buying and using heroic Ottos' boxes/stones unappealing in the extreme, and it makes staying at cap and running epic content not only unappealing, but one of the worst things you can do for character progression. That can't be one of the whiteboard goals you had outlined for Reaper mode.

The fix for this part would be twofold:

1) To apply the same multiplication to Reaper XP in Epics that you apply to Quest XP in epics. This will allow earning XP in Epics to be viable. And running quests on reaper difficulty with level 28-30 characters viable.

2) To apply the same logic you use on regular quest XP for dungeons to Reaper Quest XP. Give more XP to longer quests, with more mobs/challenge/fights. Trial By Fire and Madstone Crater cannot give the same Reaper XP. One is a 5 minute run. The other is 30-45 minutes.

It will still be beneficial to TR and ER to generate Reaper XP, but it will not be nearly the slam dunk, only way to go, anything else is crazy talk level obvious choice that it is now. People who enjoy staying at cap would be able to do so and still earn reaper XP at a reasonable rate.

I think these changes for both parts would ease a lot of the grouping issues with Reaper. I don't think that there is any solution that gives full Reaper XP to players at level cap running level 24 dungeons on reaper. That far over level, there has to be some sort of penalty. But the way the levels are calculated and the way the base Reaper XP is set is exacerbating that problem greatly.

EDIT: Sorry for the long post. I'm sure I'll get a lot of TL;DR.

[scipiojedi]

Can we have a discussion about Reaper flaws without having to label it an utter fail, a big fail, or a complete disaster?

It's like reading a bunch of Donald Trump tweets lately.

The problem with Reaper XP is the following:

A) The Reaper XP decay starts at BASE quest level +1. Hard Difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +1. Elite difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +2. Regular Quest XP decay starts starts at EFFECTIVE quest level +2. Thus, the following is true:

Proof is in the Poision: Base Quest Level - 4

Effective Quest Level on Norm: 4.
Effective Quest Level on Hard: 5
Effective Quest Level on Elite: 6
Effective Quest level on Reaper: 6 (shares with Elite)

A Level 4 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper based on Skulls.

A Level 5 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls.

A Level 6 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Hard.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -20% penalty.

A Level 7 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -25% penalty.
Quest XP on Hard with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Elite.
Full Quest XP on Reaper.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -50% penalty.

The "sweet" spot for most players was running this quest with characters between levels 4-6. As those gave the full BB and full quest XP. Now, with Reaper, the best range is 4-5. You have shrank the level range for pretty much every LFM. All across the board. And running it with a character one level above the elite effective quest level (7 in this case) would still net you full quest XP, just no BB. However, your Reaper XP loss is a whopping -50%. Some players would run stuff 1 level over like that because there was too much content at a particular level range and they were level capped and had to take a level. Losing BB wasn't that big a deal for a few quests because you still get full quest XP and there is more than enough XP in the game to level a TR or ER to cap. With no problem. BUT, now, when you need somewhere around 5-24 million Reaper XP and you are getting it in 200-800 xp chunks (at best) there is not NEARLY enough XP. So giving up 50% of it on a quest is unpleasant.

The XP penalty for reaper should be synced with Quest XP penalties and work off of Effective Quest Level, not Base Quest Level. And the curve should follow the Quest XP curve: -10, -25, -50, -75, -99. It still tops out after 6 levels over effective quest level. That would release the constriction on grouping that has occurred in the first week. Cutting off one or two levels from LFM's may seem like a minor thing, but it definitely makes grouping much more difficult. When you get into Epics, the issue is even more pronounced, since people are used to BB an addtional two levels. Now that is all gone. LFM's for a level 21 quest used to be 20-25. Now they can only be 20-22. That 3 levels cuts out a lot of players you might want to run with. Limiting grouping like this is mistake, in my opinion.

B) The other issue with Reaper XP is that it seems to be completely ignoring the length of the dungeon, the base level of the dungeon, or the challenge of the dungeon. I can get just as much XP from a 5 skull Kobold's ringleader in 3 minutes as I can from a 5 skull Von3 in 40 minutes or a 5 skull Haunted Halls in an hour. The Quest XP on epic dungeons is at least triple, if not quadruple, the quest XP in heroic dungeons. The Reaper XP does not have this same multiplication. As a result, heroic dungeons are BY FAR AND AWAY a better method for earning Reaper XP. Because they are significantly faster and easier, even on 5 skulls. This has the, I hope, unintended consequence of incentivizing heroic TR'ing. It makes Iconics less appealing by far (or buying Iconic Hearts, LR +1 Hearts, etc), It makes Epic Reincarnations (and buying ER hearts) less appealing, it makes buying and using heroic Ottos' boxes/stones unappealing in the extreme, and it makes staying at cap and running epic content not only unappealing, but one of the worst things you can do for character progression. That can't be one of the whiteboard goals you had outlined for Reaper mode.

The fix would be twofold:

1) To apply the same multiplication to Reaper XP in Epics that you apply to Quest XP in epics. This will allow earning XP in Epics to be viable. And running quests on reaper difficulty with level 28-30 characters viable.

2) To apply the same logic you use on regular quest XP for dungeons to Reaper Quest XP. Give more XP to longer quests, with more mobs/challenge/fights. Trial By Fire and Madstone Crater cannot give the same Reaper XP. One is a 5 minute run. The other is 30-45 minutes.

It will still be beneficial to TR and ER to generate Reaper XP, but it will not be nearly the slam dunk, only way to go, anything else is crazy talk level obvious choice that it is now. People who enjoy staying at cap would be able to do so and still earn reaper XP at a reasonable rate.

3) Add additional xp to quests based on the number of reapers that spawn, so if you get unlucky and have to deal with several more reapers, at least you will get more xp out of it. Either make it a flat bonus like an optional that gives the xp immediately or somehow add it into the final total for completing the quest - this method would be better because it forces people to finish rather than go into a large spawn area like Kobold assault and just farm it without ever completing.

[Yalinaa]

A) The Reaper XP decay starts at BASE quest level +1. Hard Difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +1. Elite difficulty has an effective quest level of base quest level +2. Regular Quest XP decay starts starts at EFFECTIVE quest level +2. Thus, the following is true:

Proof is in the Poision: Base Quest Level - 4

Effective Quest Level on Norm: 4.
Effective Quest Level on Hard: 5
Effective Quest Level on Elite: 6
Effective Quest level on Reaper: 6 (shares with Elite)

A Level 4 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper based on Skulls.

A Level 5 Character can get the following:
Full Quest XP on Norm.
Full Quest XP on Hard with a Hard BB bonus.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls.

A Level 6 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Hard.
Full Quest XP on Elite with an Elite BB Bonus.
Full Quest XP on Reaper with an Elite BB Bonus.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -20% penalty.

A Level 7 Character can get the following:
Quest XP on Norm with a -25% penalty.
Quest XP on Hard with a -10% penalty.
Full Quest XP on Elite.
Full Quest XP on Reaper.
Reaper XP on Reaper Based on Skulls with a -50% penalty.


Wrong. A lvl 5 character gets -20% penalty for reaper xp, a lvl 6 character gets -50% and so on.

[Renvar]

Wrong. A lvl 5 character gets -20% penalty for reaper xp, a lvl 6 character gets -50% and so on.

Hmmm...

Per the wiki: http://ddowiki.com/page/Reaper_difficulty



Overlevel penalties[edit]
There is a reaper XP over-level penalty (from the normal base challenge rating of the dungeon or raid) as follows:

+1 - None
+2 -20% (typical Bravery Bonus maximum level for Heroic)
+3 -50%
+4 -70%
+5 -90%
+6 -95%


And the release notes: https://www.ddo.com/en/update-34-release-notes



Over-level characters are not able enter quests on Reaper Difficulty. Characters cannot enter a quest on Reaper Difficulty if they are more than six levels of the base challenge rating of the dungeon or raid. Characters also cannot enter Reaper dungeons if they are Epic level and the dungeon is not.
?There is a Reaper XP over-level penalty as follows:
+2: -20%
+3: -50%
+4: -70%
+5: -90%
+6: -95%


There is no penalty for Quest level +1. If that is what you are experiencing in game, I'd say it isn't WAI and should bug report it.

[Vanhooger]

I agree with the diagnostic, I understand your concerns. But I think you fail in identifying where the true problem is. It is that most people (almost everyone) when given the opportunity to choose in between challenge or XP efficiency prefer the second. And you can't have both because something challenging and difficult will always require more time and resources and is, in general, less efficent. That has always happened and will always happen unless you remove any kind of reward, which, as you already know, will never happen either, because rewards, as you have seen in just 1 week of reaper, is what "interests" people the most.

Just find some like minded players who are interested in challenge and no rewards. I know it's hard with the current population but if you can't, maybe you just need to accept that there is not enough people interested on it and move on, either to another game or TR, like almost everyone will do. This game is strongly based on the TR system so they need to reward it in some way to give people reasons to TR.

Some of your examples and conclusions also are a bit missleading.

XP already scales with skulls, 10 skulls gives way more XP than 1 skull on any quest. XP scaling with time completion has never been balanced, you can do Spies in 5 minutes on EN for almost 100k XP or Madstone EE in 20-30 minutes for 70k XP. EN and EH have always been more time efficient than EE although EE gives more XP, that's why everyone did his daily XP runs on EN/EH.

Took us 88 min to run Madstone r10 for a 90xp, while a guildmate did last quest of catacombs and got 240 xp in 40 sec. --> Did your gildmate run catacombs 6 levels over the quest base level like you did in madstone? Or did he run it at level? Whas he getting first time bonus?

Also, I did a r10 memoirs for 900 xp in 36 min...when you can easily TR and get 900xp in 5 min on lower skull. --> If r10 gives 900 XP, lower skull should pay less not the same. If its paying the same is because of first time bonus after TR. If you do r10 with first time bonus it will pay more than 900 XP. First time bonus and repetition penalty are to prevent people farming the same good Xp/min quest over and over and encourage running all quests at least once every TR, which IMO is a good thing. Better than seeing the same 3 quests being run over and over by level 30 toons for fast XP which is what would happen with no first time bonus and repetition penalty and no over level penalty.

If the old system of giving xp was broken rewarding EN completion, this doesn't prevent the dev to make adjustment especially when doing new stuff such as reaper, but look like they prefer casual over to vets.

If you stay at cap, with the few quest at your disposal the first time bonus will last 2 day after that if you want it again you have to TR.

Low level quest at level are way easier then overlevel GH r10, unless you can prove me wrong.

[Vanhooger]

Can we have a discussion about Reaper flaws without having to label it an utter fail, a big fail, or a complete disaster?



Haven't read anything else of your post as too long, but please quote my OP were did I say that?

[Renvar]

Haven't read anything else of your post as too long, but please quote my OP were did I say that?

I didn't quote your OP when I made the statement, so I wasn't directly linking it to your post. The two responders to you, however, did make such statements. I probably should have quoted one (or both) of them to make it clear. My post was already long enough as it is, though.

[Mofus]

Rather than have Reaper max out at 6 levels over, they should allow reaper to scale to the highest level of the person in group. IE if a level 30 enters the quest, the quest should scale to level 30 mobs + any applicable scaling for reaper skulls. That way you can still run Epic von 5 & 6 and Chronoscope on reaper at cap, as well as other quests. Maybe have level 20 and above quests playable on reaper for 20-30's and under 20 scalable for non epic toons. Just a thought, but could resolve some problems for capped toons.

[Zoriaan]

I didn't quote your OP when I made the statement, so I wasn't directly linking it to your post. The two responders to you, however, did make such statements. I probably should have quoted one (or both) of them to make it clear. My post was already long enough as it is, though.

He was likely referring to me.

I cannot ER to farm reaper xp. All EPL x3. Won't even give me the dialogue to try.

Staying at cap I have a very small selection of quests I will have to farm daily on low skull if I intend to gain reaper xp as I play mainly in the day and not many people play then to do 10 skull.

I don't want to tr as I have all the past life I would ever need.

So because I want to stay at cap and play 10 skull, I will fall so far behind the reaper xp curve of people that are still on the tr train.

They system is punishing people that want to stay at cap and play the game at the top setting or are all at max past life's and want to run only 10 skull. And it is rewarding lemmings.

This is my opinion. I am entitled to it. I am also entitled to call the current way reaper is implemented a failure, as I truly believe that it is.

I love the challenge, but hate the fact I am falling behind xp wise by running 10
Skull.

Sure I can LR my DC lock to a blaster lock, chug a xp pot, and run daily low skull solo laps of epic orchard, slave lords and grim chain...as these are solo zergable...but I would much rather watch paint dry...if that is what turbine want me to do to gain reaper xp i wont be around much longer...

[Astoroth]

Now, as I said many time I do not care about reaper XP but, most people does, so doing a party at cap is nearly impossible as reaper xp give another big plus to the TR system and another big minus on staying at cap.

Reaper shouldn't be about xp but have fun and challenge, but I guess it's too late.

So xp is here to stay, at least reward who is trying harder skull & longer quest.



Can we have a discussion about Reaper flaws without having to label it an utter fail, a big fail, or a complete disaster?

The "sweet" spot for most players was running this quest with characters between levels 4-6. As those gave the full BB and full quest XP. Now, with Reaper, the best range is 4-5. You have shrank the level range for pretty much every LFM. All across the board. And running it with a character one level above the elite effective quest level (7 in this case) would still net you full quest XP, just no BB. However, your Reaper XP loss is a whopping -50%. Some players would run stuff 1 level over like that because there was too much content at a particular level range and they were level capped and had to take a level. Losing BB wasn't that big a deal for a few quests because you still get full quest XP and there is more than enough XP in the game to level a TR or ER to cap. With no problem. BUT, now, when you need somewhere around 5-24 million Reaper XP and you are getting it in 200-800 xp chunks (at best) there is not NEARLY enough XP. So giving up 50% of it on a quest is unpleasant.

1) To apply the same multiplication to Reaper XP in Epics that you apply to Quest XP in epics. This will allow earning XP in Epics to be viable. And running quests on reaper difficulty with level 28-30 characters viable.

2) To apply the same logic you use on regular quest XP for dungeons to Reaper Quest XP. Give more XP to longer quests, with more mobs/challenge/fights. Trial By Fire and Madstone Crater cannot give the same Reaper XP. One is a 5 minute run. The other is 30-45 minutes.

It will still be beneficial to TR and ER to generate Reaper XP, but it will not be nearly the slam dunk, only way to go, anything else is crazy talk level obvious choice that it is now. People who enjoy staying at cap would be able to do so and still earn reaper XP at a reasonable rate.

I think these changes for both parts would ease a lot of the grouping issues with Reaper. I don't think that there is any solution that gives full Reaper XP to players at level cap running level 24 dungeons on reaper. That far over level, there has to be some sort of penalty. But the way the levels are calculated and the way the base Reaper XP is set is exacerbating that problem greatly.

I think the real issue is the reduced population and more exclusive lfms. They shouldn't have forced reaper mode into being a replacement for ebb experience gain. The solution isn't to futz with the reaper experience but to scale back the actual experience you get for doing reaper mode, so players aren't getting basically maximum benefit in both systems at once.

[karatemack]

Reaper Trees and Reaper XP to unlock action points to spend in them was a bad idea.

You can keep the Reaper XP to unlock vendors or maybe even to spend on potions which give temporary boosts. But the new layer on the old hamster wheels has further divided the playerbase and made us return to the days of exclusive LFMs. These things are undoubtedly bad for the game.

The easiest fix is to make the Reaper XP diminish the same as in heroic content, and to remove the unnecessary Reaper Tree system from the game altogether. It's not like anyone has had enough time to unlock the full trees by now anyway... so do away with it before people have it.

Ultimately, it would have been far better for the game and the community if the DEVs would have simply rebalanced the HARD and ELITE settings rather than over-complicating the issue and introducing and entirely new difficulty mode. The changed to the Champions was good, and could have served as a good launching point to revamp ELITE to make it actually challenging again.

[elkorm]

official release notes (updated on the sly...)
https://www.ddo.com/en/update-34-release-notes
say otherwise....
?There is a Reaper XP over-level penalty as follows:

+1: -20%
+2: -50%
+3: -70%
+4: -90%
+5: -95%


Elk



Hmmm...

Per the wiki: http://ddowiki.com/page/Reaper_difficulty



And the release notes: https://www.ddo.com/en/update-34-release-notes



There is no penalty for Quest level +1. If that is what you are experiencing in game, I'd say it isn't WAI and should bug report it.

[Chai]

In this particular instance I like the new dichotomy in the in game playerbase. It proves the often and loud misrepresentation of all players by specific forums posters incorrect regarding keeping elite easy so people can have their easy Xp/favor because its what "everyone" wants. We can clearly see that when incentivized correctly, we can have challenge, with forced cooperation, and people will stop listening to the myths perpetuated about being "forced" to play a certain way, and actually play the way they like.

Dont get me wrong, elite hasnt changed and some still choose to play elite so they can ride the XP wave into TR life after TR life, but enough are playing reaper, disproving much of the mythology that most or all players wanted to zerg TRs with no danger in their gaming experience. Many are opting to take longer to run quests, and some have even posted they had fun even when they failed to complete a quest, due to the fact that the possibility of failure now exists when they are on their -A- game.

Reaper also shows how much all characters would have to be nerfed in order to get this mythical class vs class balance to occur, and be in line with the content, showing how long content balance has been eroded, as this didnt just happen overnight. In some cases people are playing characters that are temporarily nerfed 90+% in some aspects while the mobs are buffed even more and they still complete the quest.

[karatemack]

In this particular instance I like the new dichotomy in the in game playerbase. It proves the often and loud misrepresentation of all players by specific forums posters incorrect regarding keeping elite easy so people can have their easy Xp/favor because its what "everyone" wants. We can clearly see that when incentivized correctly, we can have challenge, with forced cooperation, and people will stop listening to the myths perpetuated about being "forced" to play a certain way, and actually play the way they like.

Dont get me wrong, elite hasnt changed and some still choose to play elite so they can ride the XP wave into TR life after TR life, but enough are playing reaper, disproving much of the mythology that most or all players wanted to zerg TRs with no danger in their gaming experience. Many are opting to take longer to run quests, and some have even posted they had fun even when they failed to complete a quest, due to the fact that the possibility of failure now exists when they are on their -A- game.

Reaper also shows how much all characters would have to be nerfed in order to get this mythical class vs class balance to occur, and be in line with the content, showing how long content balance has been eroded, as this didnt just happen overnight. In some cases people are playing characters that are temporarily nerfed 90+% in some aspects while the mobs are buffed even more and they still complete the quest.

1) It's too early to say Reaper has proven or disproven anything as of yet. There might be elements we like or dislike about Reaper, but the way people choose to engage with Reaper mode over the long term will take time to tell. Many people will play with the new shiny because it is new and shiny.

2) The power creep you mention that Reaper reveals... is only further complicated by the addition of Reaper trees. Eventually... we will need a 12 or 15 skull Reaper mode since 10 skulls just won't be enough of a challenge anymore. And just imagine if they ever come to believe that expanding the level cap again would be a good idea...

3) The changes made in Reaper mode (vs elite/hard/normal/casual) are not the only ways to increase the difficulty of content.

4) It will probably be another 5 years or so until the class passes are actually complete. "Balance" is a tricky concept to play with and since there is really no standard for the level at which each class should perform at... it is really difficult to say whether or not the desired ends have been met. I do seem to recall at one point a DEV stating that Swashbuckler was the standard for class balance... but how that equates to Savants/Warpriests or Arcanotechnicians I couldn't say. Since that is subjective (the balance between the classes), how can you balance out the content vs the classes effectively? How much time should be given to updating old quests vs developing new content? Once you stack up past lives (epic/iconic/heroic) does your experience in heroic content even count as a valid gauge from which that lower-level content should be adjusted?

5) How long until people whine about not being able to keep up or participate in Reaper? How long until their cries of "unfair" are heard and Reaper gets toned down the same way ELITE was before it?

[Chai]

1) It's too early to say Reaper has proven or disproven anything as of yet. There might be elements we like or dislike about Reaper, but the way people choose to engage with Reaper mode over the long term will take time to tell. Many people will play with the new shiny because it is new and shiny.

Enough people are playing it now, so we can say its a success now, and indeed it has proven that there are people who do want some forced cooperation.


2) The power creep you mention that Reaper reveals... is only further complicated by the addition of Reaper trees. Eventually... we will need a 12 or 15 skull Reaper mode since 10 skulls just won't be enough of a challenge anymore. And just imagine if they ever come to believe that expanding the level cap again would be a good idea...

Which is fine as that power is only available in that setting. They can ratchet the skulls up as high as they want. More gradient difficulty selection is a good thing. Its much better than when EH was too easy but EE was too challenging right around 2012 or so. This allows everyone to find their sweet spot.


3) The changes made in Reaper mode (vs elite/hard/normal/casual) are not the only ways to increase the difficulty of content.

Most of the others were shouted down on the forums over the years. Thus reaper mode was needed, so elite could stay the same.


4) It will probably be another 5 years or so until the class passes are actually complete. "Balance" is a tricky concept to play with and since there is really no standard for the level at which each class should perform at... it is really difficult to say whether or not the desired ends have been met. I do seem to recall at one point a DEV stating that Swashbuckler was the standard for class balance... but how that equates to Savants/Warpriests or Arcanotechnicians I couldn't say. Since that is subjective (the balance between the classes), how can you balance out the content vs the classes effectively? How much time should be given to updating old quests vs developing new content? Once you stack up past lives (epic/iconic/heroic) does your experience in heroic content even count as a valid gauge from which that lower-level content should be adjusted?

Balance is a nonexistant concept in D&D 3.5 because of all of the unique mechanics involved. Look at all of the MMOesque mechanics that were added just to try to get closer to balanced, and how much power creep ensued from those things alone. People continue to disagree with me on this and demand balance, and hilarity ensues when the end result is an even less balanced game.


5) How long until people whine about not being able to keep up or participate in Reaper? How long until their cries of "unfair" are heard and Reaper gets toned down the same way ELITE was before it?

Hopefully the dev response to that is "WAI" and they dont tone it down at all. Elite hasnt changed a bit. They still have what they previously advocated.

[Qhualor]

In this particular instance I like the new dichotomy in the in game playerbase. It proves the often and loud misrepresentation of all players by specific forums posters incorrect regarding keeping elite easy so people can have their easy Xp/favor because its what "everyone" wants. We can clearly see that when incentivized correctly, we can have challenge, with forced cooperation, and people will stop listening to the myths perpetuated about being "forced" to play a certain way, and actually play the way they like.

Dont get me wrong, elite hasnt changed and some still choose to play elite so they can ride the XP wave into TR life after TR life, but enough are playing reaper, disproving much of the mythology that most or all players wanted to zerg TRs with no danger in their gaming experience. Many are opting to take longer to run quests, and some have even posted they had fun even when they failed to complete a quest, due to the fact that the possibility of failure now exists when they are on their -A- game.

Reaper also shows how much all characters would have to be nerfed in order to get this mythical class vs class balance to occur, and be in line with the content, showing how long content balance has been eroded, as this didnt just happen overnight. In some cases people are playing characters that are temporarily nerfed 90+% in some aspects while the mobs are buffed even more and they still complete the quest.

I agree that a lot of forum players have done a 180 in their representation of the player base, but what I don't agree with is that its been incentivized properly. what many players envisioned for Reaper actually became the complete opposite. its true that also many forumites expressed that they wouldn't bother with Reaper or participate little in it if there wasn't a good carrot involved besides just for challenge. if Reaper was incentivized properly it wouldn't transition many players to only or mostly play Reaper leaving behind the other difficulties causing a clear unbalanced divide with the player base. what it looks to me like is that Reaper was incentivized too much, which I was told by many forum players that the rewards were too minor to be seriously considered. some are not playing Reaper just because they enjoy the added challenge. some are doing it because of better xp and I am seeing more and more lfms for Reaper loot farms, which I was told many times by forum players wasn't going to happen. R1-3 is very popular across all level ranges from what I am seeing and hearing and I do believe it is forming as the new elite.

once again we go back to the same old issues of incentivizing elite so much that it is where most players spend their time making it harder for those who want to run lower difficulties. players not ready for higher difficulties once again make their way into the settings where most everyone else is if they want to play with others. this is what I see as a fail with Reaper. here we are over a week later and its still the same as day 1 where Reaper is the popular choice for grouping or soloing. I do still see the occasional EN dailies and the occasional EH/EE lfms, but nowhere near as much as it was prior to the update. Reaper does seem to be successful, but its at a cost. over the next week or 3 I will be looking forward to Severlin and his thoughts on Reaper after they have compiled their data numbers and what course of action they plan on taking.

[crazycaren]

The fix for this part would be twofold:

1) To apply the same multiplication to Reaper XP in Epics that you apply to Quest XP in epics. This will allow earning XP in Epics to be viable. And running quests on reaper difficulty with level 28-30 characters viable.

2) To apply the same logic you use on regular quest XP for dungeons to Reaper Quest XP. Give more XP to longer quests, with more mobs/challenge/fights. Trial By Fire and Madstone Crater cannot give the same Reaper XP. One is a 5 minute run. The other is 30-45 minutes.

It will still be beneficial to TR and ER to generate Reaper XP, but it will not be nearly the slam dunk, only way to go, anything else is crazy talk level obvious choice that it is now. People who enjoy staying at cap would be able to do so and still earn reaper XP at a reasonable rate.

I think these changes for both parts would ease a lot of the grouping issues with Reaper. I don't think that there is any solution that gives full Reaper XP to players at level cap running level 24 dungeons on reaper. That far over level, there has to be some sort of penalty. But the way the levels are calculated and the way the base Reaper XP is set is exacerbating that problem greatly.

EDIT: Sorry for the long post. I'm sure I'll get a lot of TL;DR.

/signed

[Chai]

I agree that a lot of forum players have done a 180 in their representation of the player base, but what I don't agree with is that its been incentivized properly. what many players envisioned for Reaper actually became the complete opposite. its true that also many forumites expressed that they wouldn't bother with Reaper or participate little in it if there wasn't a good carrot involved besides just for challenge. if Reaper was incentivized properly it wouldn't transition many players to only or mostly play Reaper leaving behind the other difficulties causing a clear unbalanced divide with the player base. what it looks to me like is that Reaper was incentivized too much, which I was told by many forum players that the rewards were too minor to be seriously considered. some are not playing Reaper just because they enjoy the added challenge. some are doing it because of better xp and I am seeing more and more lfms for Reaper loot farms, which I was told many times by forum players wasn't going to happen. R1-3 is very popular across all level ranges from what I am seeing and hearing and I do believe it is forming as the new elite.


once again we go back to the same old issues of incentivizing elite so much that it is where most players spend their time making it harder for those who want to run lower difficulties. players not ready for higher difficulties once again make their way into the settings where most everyone else is if they want to play with others. this is what I see as a fail with Reaper. here we are over a week later and its still the same as day 1 where Reaper is the popular choice for grouping or soloing. I do still see the occasional EN dailies and the occasional EH/EE lfms, but nowhere near as much as it was prior to the update. Reaper does seem to be successful, but its at a cost. over the next week or 3 I will be looking forward to Severlin and his thoughts on Reaper after they have compiled their data numbers and what course of action they plan on taking.

I dont believe those other difficulties were left behind. People still play elite for xp/min. The real issue there is people need to put up their LFM for what they want, rather than expecting someone else to do it so they can join up, or call it a failure if this doesnt happen. My normal difficulty once and done TRs showed that I could easily get joiners even for normal difficulty, proving much of the mythology on the forums regarding people all flocking to one setting whether they are ready or not to largely be false. Its a matter of people representing what they want to do by creating LFMs for just that, rather than holding the expectation that their interests need to be represented in the LFM over the rest of us.

[Eryhn]

i think with the way they introduced this the notion of reaper not giving xp at all is kinda pointless as thats not something they would make happen even if they listened.

i also dont personally want that. I think for the large majority of people who are not triple everything it is NICE to be able to level up and at the same time slowly accumulate some reaper xp, and to maybe even level heroics faster by streaking reaper.

however, at the same time the OP saying it sucks for people who are done TRing, or dont WANT to TR, or wanna stay at cap reaping is totally valid too.


-I think like DDO talk said the thing about base quest level/effective quest level should be fixed, it doesnt make sense to me anyways that in order to run reaper the XP design implies you not only challenge yourself with reaper but further challenge yourself by running the quest 2 levels earlier than with E BB.

-I think in epics the Lockout mechanic needs to be further loosened.

-Any epic raid should be able to be 10skulled at cap for those who wanna undertake that challenge.
(given that A LOT of the lower epic raids gear is outdated, and remains outdated even with some reaper bonus slapped on, people farming lvl20 raids at 1-4 skull on capped toons for gear seems a completely negligible argument to me, compared to the positive effect of allowing many people FUN with old raids on reaper)

-In epics the potential level range for people to run reaper quests together should at least be the same as with EE BB.

Since the devs decided to introduce this new setting WITH XP and gains, and WITH a grind, it is up to THEM to adjust the gains in such a way that ALL people get something decent out of the way they run it. Aka, if this had been done as pure challenge w/o xp, reaper xp, reaper trees, rewards, who cares, but as a design decision was made to include grind for rewards, allow roughly equal rewards to all ways of engaging with reaper.

- So, yeah, thus, epic reaper XP should be increased some probably, too to account for the fact that by and large heroic quest completions grant reaper xp faster

[Qhualor]

I dont believe those other difficulties were left behind. People still play elite for xp/min. The real issue there is people need to put up their LFM for what they want, rather than expecting someone else to do it so they can join up, or call it a failure if this doesnt happen. My normal difficulty once and done TRs showed that I could easily get joiners even for normal difficulty, proving much of the mythology on the forums regarding people all flocking to one setting whether they are ready or not to largely be false. Its a matter of people representing what they want to do by creating LFMs for just that, rather than holding the expectation that their interests need to be represented in the LFM over the rest of us.

I'm sure there are players not putting up lfms, but I highly doubt that is why I am seeing a significant decrease in normal-elite lfms.

when you did the one and done on normal that was prior to Reaper.

as of right now looking at the lfm on Khyber across all levels

9 total lfms
1 is epic with 1 player in the group for EE IP
3 are for HE
4 is for R1 or higher on Heroics
1 is a ghost lfm

this has been pretty similar at night for the past week or so

[Chai]

I'm sure there are players not putting up lfms, but I highly doubt that is why I am seeing a significant decrease in normal-elite lfms.

Yep because the players who wanted the challenge were playing elite and mostly not being challenged.

Now count how many people are on the server. Those people are either already grouped, soloing, or waiting for someone else to post a group. 2 of those are a good strategy to enjoy a game if thats what people enjoy. The third is not.


when you did the one and done on normal that was prior to Reaper.

Still proved all the myths about elite incorrect. Elite was the same then as it is now. I was told no one joins those other difficulty LFMs. I was told "everyone" wanted elite to stay the way it was. Those who claimed this were wrong, and proven so.


as of right now looking at the lfm on Khyber across all levels

9 total lfms
1 is epic with 1 player in the group for EE IP
3 are for HE
4 is for R1 or higher on Heroics
1 is a ghost lfm

this has been pretty similar at night for the past week or so

But when I put up an LFM on that server for something other than reaper, people join it. As I stated before, expecting other LFMs to represent your interests is a worse strategy than people representing their own interests by putting up their own LFMs. The claim of "I cant get in an LFM I want because there are no LFMs I want posted" is a bad claim, because people have the power to post their own LFMs.

[Qhualor]

Yep because the players who wanted the challenge were playing elite and mostly not being challenged.

Now count how many people are on the server. Those people are either already grouped, soloing, or waiting for someone else to post a group. 2 of those are a good strategy to enjoy a game if thats what people enjoy. The third is not.



Still proved all the myths about elite incorrect. Elite was the same then as it is now. I was told no one joins those other difficulty LFMs. I was told "everyone" wanted elite to stay the way it was. Those who claimed this were wrong, and proven so.



But when I put up an LFM on that server for something other than reaper, people join it. As I stated before, expecting other LFMs to represent your interests is a worse strategy than people representing their own interests by putting up their own LFMs. The claim of "I cant get in an LFM I want because there are no LFMs I want posted" is a bad claim, because people have the power to post their own LFMs.

The only thing you proved about getting groups together for running normal heroic content was that it could be done. You would need to do it over several lives to come to some kind of meaninful conclusion, especially with Reaper now here. Did you also interview all players that joined your groups and ask why they were running normal instead of elite?

Putting up an lfm for 5 other players to join on occasion still isn't a meaningful conclusion. You would need to do this regularly while also comparing to other lfms and what they are doing. This is something I have been doing on my server for ~6 years.

[Chai]

The only thing you proved about getting groups together for running normal heroic content was that it could be done. You would need to do it over several lives to come to some kind of meaninful conclusion, especially with Reaper now here. Did you also interview all players that joined your groups and ask why they were running normal instead of elite?

If thats the case, then none of the feedback on reaper is valid until the completely unnecessary and arbitraty time constraint is met. Why are people posting it then?

Because its valid regardless of peoples personal time constraints. What you and some others have done here is created some time constraint based position to dismiss what is actually happening, due to inability to refute what is actually happening. When that time is up the goal posts will inevitably be moved to a greater unit of time all to declare the fact that people enjoy the new setting irrelevant because it doesnt support the narrative at that point in time, just like it doesnt support the narrative currently.

In other news, we can meaningfully conclude NOW that those calling reaper a failure NOW are incorrect NOW because people are playing it NOW, and it has also been shown NOW that folks can create groups in elite, hard and normal NOW and still enjoy playing the game, NOW. No time arbitrary constraint on time is needed. :p

I didnt need to interview anyone and ask them why they were playing normal. The fact that they joined regularly proved the narrative that I could only get joiners in elite, vastly incorrect. I will do a hard once and done TR next now that reaper is out to prove the current mythology incorrect as well.

The problem of low LFMs is not caused by reaper, just like it wasnt caused by elite in the past. Its caused by people not starting LFMs, and demanding their interests be represented by someone else in the LFM rather than having to start their own.


Putting up an lfm for 5 other players to join on occasion still isn't a meaningful conclusion. You would need to do this regularly while also comparing to other lfms and what they are doing. This is something I have been doing on my server for ~6 years.

Calling what I am doing "on occasion" is simply more confirmation bias. You incorrectly assume I havent been doing this the entire time I played this game while you have been for 6 years. Ive been on multiple servers putting up LFMs for the difficulty I want to play at that time, since beta. The problem is the same then as it is now. People are demanding their interests be served by others in the LFM and making claims on the state of the game based on what they see in the LFM, all while not being willing to represent their own interests by putting up their own LFM. I can draw that meaningful conclusion through the entirety of my play experience in DDO ~11 years on multiple servers.

[RoberttheBard]

If the old system of giving xp was broken rewarding EN completion, this doesn't prevent the dev to make adjustment especially when doing new stuff such as reaper, but look like they prefer casual over to vets.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh wait, you're serious? Here's the problem with your logic:

The "Casuals" weren't clogging the forums with "The game's too easy, we need a challenge". This persisted whilst Reaper was a myth. Once Reaper became a reality, the battle cry changed to "It won't be worth running if there's no rewards". Again, this wasn't "the casuals". This was from the vets that expected Reaper to be catered specifically to them, and when challenge was on the board for introduction into the game, they hurried up to make sure they could get new shiny toys for running what was supposed to be added for challenge.


If you stay at cap, with the few quest at your disposal the first time bonus will last 2 day after that if you want it again you have to TR.

Low level quest at level are way easier then overlevel GH r10, unless you can prove me wrong.

That's some rather warped logic, isn't it? Most of GH Normal is harder than some low level Elite quests, especially in Epic levels... Sorry that your daily run can't consist of constantly running the same X quests over and over expecting Reaper XP to be doled out just as regular XP is, but that wasn't the stated design goal in the first place, which was "We expect it's going to take a long time to cap this". You claim it's catering to the Casuals, and yet, it's very existence is predicated by Vets insisting they needed "more challenge", and that that "more challenge" wouldn't be worth running w/out rewards.

[Muktor]

Level lockout and xp penalties at least for epic quests are a big fail in this terrible reaper system.
I agree. Surprised they had this at release ... even more surprised it wasn't fixed in Patch 1. Why not just use the same rules for Reaper XP as they already had for normal XP? That system always seems to work well enough.

Sometimes it feels like the developers forget that D&D is about having fun and letting players choose the way they want to play.

[Avantasian]

For people who are getting their reaper levels -> Disrupts the endgame by making it far more efficent to level reaper by doing TR's.
For people who have their reaper levels -> Makes leveling beyond trivial thanks to reaper bonuses in R1.


Reaper exp should really just have been for endgame, just like destinies.

[Qhualor]

at this moment I must eat my words. I haven't seen this many EE lfms since the update all at once. unfortunately, real life forced me to log out. hopefully when I get back later we can keep this up.

[Vanhooger]

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!! Oh wait, you're serious? Here's the problem with your logic:

The "Casuals" weren't clogging the forums with "The game's too easy, we need a challenge". This persisted whilst Reaper was a myth. Once Reaper became a reality, the battle cry changed to "It won't be worth running if there's no rewards". Again, this wasn't "the casuals". This was from the vets that expected Reaper to be catered specifically to them, and when challenge was on the board for introduction into the game, they hurried up to make sure they could get new shiny toys for running what was supposed to be added for challenge.



That's some rather warped logic, isn't it? Most of GH Normal is harder than some low level Elite quests, especially in Epic levels... Sorry that your daily run can't consist of constantly running the same X quests over and over expecting Reaper XP to be doled out just as regular XP is, but that wasn't the stated design goal in the first place, which was "We expect it's going to take a long time to cap this". You claim it's catering to the Casuals, and yet, it's very existence is predicated by Vets insisting they needed "more challenge", and that that "more challenge" wouldn't be worth running w/out rewards.
whats your point? I dont understand what your talking about sry.

[RoberttheBard]

whats your point? I dont understand what your talking about sry.

You claim it's built the way it is because SSG prefers casuals. This is false. Casual players were not all over the forums for years screaming from the top of whatever soap box they could find that they needed challenge. This was the veteran players. They screamed, they cried, they threatened, they begged, and then, when they got "MOAR CHALLENGE", they insisted it wasn't going to be worth it without "MOAR REWARDS". Nothing that led to Reaper had anything to do with casuals, it was all vets, and nothing but the vets, and some of us were against it from the start, because some of us knew that it was going to come down to "but we need more toys, or it's not worth it".

[Wizza]

You claim it's built the way it is because SSG prefers casuals. This is false. Casual players were not all over the forums for years screaming from the top of whatever soap box they could find that they needed challenge. This was the veteran players. They screamed, they cried, they threatened, they begged, and then, when they got "MOAR CHALLENGE", they insisted it wasn't going to be worth it without "MOAR REWARDS". Nothing that led to Reaper had anything to do with casuals, it was all vets, and nothing but the vets, and some of us were against it from the start, because some of us knew that it was going to come down to "but we need more toys, or it's not worth it".

Except the majority of the forum didn't want the XP.

[Eryhn]

Except the majority of the forum didn't want the XP.

well it's here now and it won't go away so they better balance it out.

[Pyed-Pyper]

The trees need to DIAF. But they're not going away because they're new and shiny and took so long to do. The best we might hope for is that they get level locked at 30. But considering we have EPLs available at level 1, even that little 'compromise' is probably way too much hope for.

[Vanhooger]

You claim it's built the way it is because SSG prefers casuals. This is false. Casual players were not all over the forums for years screaming from the top of whatever soap box they could find that they needed challenge. This was the veteran players. They screamed, they cried, they threatened, they begged, and then, when they got "MOAR CHALLENGE", they insisted it wasn't going to be worth it without "MOAR REWARDS". Nothing that led to Reaper had anything to do with casuals, it was all vets, and nothing but the vets, and some of us were against it from the start, because some of us knew that it was going to come down to "but we need more toys, or it's not worth it".
You think I would have done madstone R10 If I cared about xp?
Go back in the lamannia forum and please link me a single post were I said I wanted xp, reward and tree, actually was the opposite but whatever.
Now the xp is going to stay and they need to balance it out or most people will just tr instead of doing the few quest at cap leaving endgame dead.

[Vanhooger]

well it's here now and it won't go away so they better balance it out.
Exactly.

[slarden]

You claim it's built the way it is because SSG prefers casuals. This is false. Casual players were not all over the forums for years screaming from the top of whatever soap box they could find that they needed challenge. This was the veteran players. They screamed, they cried, they threatened, they begged, and then, when they got "MOAR CHALLENGE", they insisted it wasn't going to be worth it without "MOAR REWARDS". Nothing that led to Reaper had anything to do with casuals, it was all vets, and nothing but the vets, and some of us were against it from the start, because some of us knew that it was going to come down to "but we need more toys, or it's not worth it". Yep I didn't see any casual asking for more reaper rewards. It's many of the same people complaining about the reaper tree that wanted more rewards.

[Morroiel]

Yep I didn't see any casual asking for more reaper rewards. It's many of the same people complaining about the reaper tree that wanted more rewards.

I was vehemently against reaper rewards (besides maybe cosmetics - though tbh I don't care one way or another about them either). Against reaper loot. Against reaper lockout. Against reaper xp in general. Against reaper only pots (prr/mrr etc).

I am still against these things, and I have NEVER once asked for more rewards or for a better xp curve. In fact, I've consistently asked for the opposite to try to reduce the impact of the power creep as much as possible.

I am not alone - most of the players who took my position echo my behavior.

[slarden]

I was vehemently against reaper rewards (besides maybe cosmetics - though tbh I don't care one way or another about them either). Against reaper loot. Against reaper lockout. Against reaper xp in general. Against reaper only pots (prr/mrr etc).

I am still against these things, and I have NEVER once asked for more rewards or for a better xp curve. In fact, I've consistently asked for the opposite to try to reduce the impact of the power creep as much as possible.

I am not alone - most of the players who took my position echo my behavior.

Hence the reason I used "many" and not "all". I was also against power-adding reaper rewards, but it seemed clear to me from the threads of Lamannia the majority wanted more rewards. Not to say they wanted exactly what the devs gave us - but they clearly wanted more.

[Ellihor]

Hence the reason I used "many" and not "all". I was also against power-adding reaper rewards, but it seemed clear to me from the threads of Lamannia the majority wanted more rewards. Not to say they wanted exactly what the devs gave us - but they clearly wanted more.

It seemed clear to me the majority did not want rewards. I don't know where are you pulling this information from, but they clearly wanted less. I don't understand why do you keep repeating these on different threads, and what's is your goal with that. Just check the lama forums, the majority were against the rewards. There was a minority wanting really low power rewards and the +3 prr etc reaper bonuses were fine for those.

[Qhualor]

It seemed clear to me the majority did not want rewards. I don't know where are you pulling this information from, but they clearly wanted less. I don't understand why do you keep repeating these on different threads, and what's is your goal with that. Just check the lama forums, the majority were against the rewards. There was a minority wanting really low power rewards and the +3 prr etc reaper bonuses were fine for those.

I wouldn't say the majority did not want rewards, but rather did, if you go further back than Lamannia before most of us knew that Reaper was being actively discussed and designed behind the scenes. many, including me, talked about how Reaper would not be successful if the reward for completing Reaper was just challenge. carrots are what gets most players motivated to want to run content and to me, its pretty obvious throughout the history of the game. the quality of rewards are obviously subjective because some call them minor while others call them powerful. even SSG thinks they are not that powerful, except for the part on DCs that they agreed needed to be adjusted.

if the rewards were just cosmetic like some were asking for, how long before players stop running Reaper after they unlocked those? if there were no rewards other than just for challenge, how long before players stopped running Reaper? with nothing worth chasing for players or only takes X time to unlock what you want with nothing left to chase, how can SSG justify development time for something that would ultimately get underused? I am not at all saying I agree with the reward choices or lack of or the level of power the rewards offer or SSGs decision to include another major grind to the game, but the finger pointing definitely goes to the players for a lot of what we see in Reaper.

[RoberttheBard]

You think I would have done madstone R10 If I cared about xp?
Go back in the lamannia forum and please link me a single post were I said I wanted xp, reward and tree, actually was the opposite but whatever.
Now the xp is going to stay and they need to balance it out or most people will just tr instead of doing the few quest at cap leaving endgame dead.

So, what does this have to do with the context of your statement, and my response? You said it's because of casuals, and I have twice now pointed out that that's not the case. So, here's what should be happening, you should be showing me all these posts by casuals saying they wanted Reaper in the first place, and that they wanted it with rewards. Because the insistence that it would have to be rewards is indeed in the Lamma forums. Someone pointed it out the last time someone tried to claim this just came out of nowhere. So show me all these casuals that were demanding reaper/reaper rewards, or realize that your premise is wrong, and move on.

[karatemack]

Enough people are playing it now, so we can say its a success now, and indeed it has proven that there are people who do want some forced cooperation.

Anyone who has read the forums or played the game in the last 2 years know that there are some who prefer forced cooperation, while there are others who want to solo everything. Some people want a "balanced party required" whereas others hate having to wait around for a cleric/healer. We didn't need Reaper to know this. Plus this largely misses my point that it is too soon to claim that we now know exactly what type of tactics/playstyle/whatever players enjoy because "Reaper". As people adjust their playstyle to Reaper mode, it may very well be that many decide that soloing R1 is the way to go. Or, people may realize that the XP curve for the trees is too steep to be an enticing incentive and, as a result, abandon Reaper mode altogether. Plus, given the power creep in the Reaper Trees and the length of time it takes to unlock them all, we may see additional adjustments to how people engage with content down the line as they unlock those pockets of power creep.


Which is fine as that power is only available in that setting. They can ratchet the skulls up as high as they want. More gradient difficulty selection is a good thing. Its much better than when EH was too easy but EE was too challenging right around 2012 or so. This allows everyone to find their sweet spot.

There is an argument there to be made... except that people have already completed R10. That should be impossible. Also, the more "sweet spots" there are for individuals... the further segregated the playerbase is. We already had people complaining that either they were forced to run ELITE or nothing, or that people in their circle wouldn't run anything more difficult than HARD. All you've done now is compounded that problem by introducing 10 additional difficulty settings over which the players will be spread. How large of a community do you think there will be for R3? R5? R7? Is the playerbase really large enough to accomodate 13 different difficulty settings?



Most of the others were shouted down on the forums over the years. Thus reaper mode was needed, so elite could stay the same.

That isn't a good argument. The fact that diverse opinions exist is not an indicator that all those opinions are equally valid. The community of DDO would have been much better served by a strengthening of HARD/ELITE rather than the introduction of an new difficulty mode with additional power creep.



Balance is a nonexistant concept in D&D 3.5 because of all of the unique mechanics involved. Look at all of the MMOesque mechanics that were added just to try to get closer to balanced, and how much power creep ensued from those things alone. People continue to disagree with me on this and demand balance, and hilarity ensues when the end result is an even less balanced game.

A game of semantics is pointless here. I agree that "balance" is a tricky word to use... how do you balance the DPS of a barbarian vs the necro DCs of a PM? That is why discussion is needed. However, if you're suggesting that some it is impossible to get multiple classes/prestiges to perform within their unique design (whether insta-kills, DPS, survivability, CC, etc.) at about the same level, then you shouldn't even include yourself in these discussions. The effectiveness of a given class/ability's design can be measured and compared to the effectiveness of other classes.



Hopefully the dev response to that is "WAI" and they dont tone it down at all. Elite hasnt changed a bit. They still have what they previously advocated.

Except... that isn't how it happens. The DEV team views character progression as a key element of the MMO survival. We will get new gear over time which out-performs slavers gear at CAP. Sentient Weapons will surely add a large amount of power creep as well. Additional classes will be added... maybe we will even one day get additional Destiny Spheres and EPLs... IPLs... power creep will happen. And as the power creep happens... and as people unlock more and more of the Reaper Trees... the challenge of Reaper will become less and less.

And yet... this power creep will happen for some players far faster than it happens for others. You will have some players still "stuck" on R1 while most groups are rolling through R10 like they were Legendary Elites. This will lead to a divide with some players saying Reaper is too hard, while others are begging for more challenge yet again. Maybe they'll just add R11-20 at that point? Add in Reaper TR?

Don't get me wrong... I'm not against Reaper mode entirely. There are many issues with the game and the challenge of content for vets which I feel it does address. In fact, if they removed the Reaper Trees so that Reaper did not offer any additional power creep outside of the Reaper bonus to equipment, this would solve some of the issue. Even better would be if they cranked up Reaper 10 a few more notches so that no one would be able to complete it for years. That way, Reaper would be ahead of the power creep curve in a way it just isn't today. Maybe make Reaper 1 the equivalent of where R4 is right now and adjust the rest from there.

[Vanhooger]

So, what does this have to do with the context of your statement, and my response? You said it's because of casuals, and I have twice now pointed out that that's not the case. So, here's what should be happening, you should be showing me all these posts by casuals saying they wanted Reaper in the first place, and that they wanted it with rewards. Because the insistence that it would have to be rewards is indeed in the Lamma forums. Someone pointed it out the last time someone tried to claim this just came out of nowhere. So show me all these casuals that were demanding reaper/reaper rewards, or realize that your premise is wrong, and move on.

Can you read at least? I said dev prefer casual to vets. If casual don't want reaper they can just ignore it, the game will be the same as before for them. What's your point again? But yeah as you said move on.

[96th_Malice]

Absolutely agree!!
They need to do something...but this current xp system for lvl 30 toons parked at cap who are only interested in high skull stuff is complete and utter fail!!

The the current XP rate for reaper ... vs time to complete quests ... vs actual rewards ... vs making it HARDER for players to get into groups. It all screams fail. ( for some )

Personally I think the idea of Reaper is great it maybe just needs some polishing.

I will just stick to EE for now thanks.

Reaper has done one VERY positive thing for me however ..... it's made EE seem much easier for my gimp toons

[Borkor]

I cannot ER to farm reaper xp. All EPL x3. Won't even give me the dialogue to try.

This is not correct. You can ER even after you have all your ER PLs. The dialogue will specifically warn you that you will get no PL benefit - but you can do it - I have. I did it to run with a guildie to cap with BB...

[RoberttheBard]

Can you read at least? I said dev prefer casual to vets. If casual don't want reaper they can just ignore it, the game will be the same as before for them. What's your point again? But yeah as you said move on.

Perhaps we're having a language problem here.

Prefer means that they would build for the casuals. When you prefer something, you choose it first. Now, assuming we're not having a language barrier problem, can you show me where casuals are insisting that they need more challenge, or that they need more rewards to incentivize running the more challenging content?

Prefer (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prefer)

Hopefully this alleviates your confusion, because repeating something that you've read on the internet doesn't make it accurate.

[Chai]

Anyone who has read the forums or played the game in the last 2 years know that there are some who prefer forced cooperation, while there are others who want to solo everything. Some people want a "balanced party required" whereas others hate having to wait around for a cleric/healer. We didn't need Reaper to know this. Plus this largely misses my point that it is too soon to claim that we now know exactly what type of tactics/playstyle/whatever players enjoy because "Reaper". As people adjust their playstyle to Reaper mode, it may very well be that many decide that soloing R1 is the way to go. Or, people may realize that the XP curve for the trees is too steep to be an enticing incentive and, as a result, abandon Reaper mode altogether. Plus, given the power creep in the Reaper Trees and the length of time it takes to unlock them all, we may see additional adjustments to how people engage with content down the line as they unlock those pockets of power creep.

The forums said no to balancing content where the adjectives actually meant what they said, where elite was a challenge etc....so yes, at that point, reaper was needed.


There is an argument there to be made... except that people have already completed R10. That should be impossible. Also, the more "sweet spots" there are for individuals... the further segregated the playerbase is. We already had people complaining that either they were forced to run ELITE or nothing, or that people in their circle wouldn't run anything more difficult than HARD. All you've done now is compounded that problem by introducing 10 additional difficulty settings over which the players will be spread. How large of a community do you think there will be for R3? R5? R7? Is the playerbase really large enough to accomodate 13 different difficulty settings?

MMO progression systems have always been like this. When a new expansion was released in any other MMO where loot is an incentive, the players always have to beat the new content first to get the loot. Thats the entire point, and not a good argument for denying progression or incentive.


That isn't a good argument. The fact that diverse opinions exist is not an indicator that all those opinions are equally valid. The community of DDO would have been much better served by a strengthening of HARD/ELITE rather than the introduction of an new difficulty mode with additional power creep.

On the contrary, its a great argument. The fact that diverse opinions exist AND each persons money is just as green as the next persons, means each of those opinions is indeed equally valid. The forums said no to strengthening hard and elite, for years and years that idea was shouted down, so reaper was needed, as was new progression.


A game of semantics is pointless here.

Thats fine, Im not engaging in semantics. I am stating facts.


I agree that "balance" is a tricky word to use... how do you balance the DPS of a barbarian vs the necro DCs of a PM? That is why discussion is needed. However, if you're suggesting that some it is impossible to get multiple classes/prestiges to perform within their unique design (whether insta-kills, DPS, survivability, CC, etc.) at about the same level, then you shouldn't even include yourself in these discussions. The effectiveness of a given class/ability's design can be measured and compared to the effectiveness of other classes.

And this is the entire reason D&D 3.5 abandoned the quest of balancing the game, and new editions had to be created to balance D&D. If you really wanted to crusade against power creep, you should have started that crusade each and every time generic MMO mechanics were introduced into DDO in order to use them to scale character abilities in the name of "balance" - as these have added far more power creep than anythign we are talking about currently.



Except... that isn't how it happens. The DEV team views character progression as a key element of the MMO survival. We will get new gear over time which out-performs slavers gear at CAP. Sentient Weapons will surely add a large amount of power creep as well. Additional classes will be added... maybe we will even one day get additional Destiny Spheres and EPLs... IPLs... power creep will happen. And as the power creep happens... and as people unlock more and more of the Reaper Trees... the challenge of Reaper will become less and less.

You are agreeing with me here, albeit in attempt to disagree.

Furthermore, what you described is called progression, not power creep. When the difficulty stagnates but the power rises that is creep. When the difficulty increases and the power increases that is progression. Why now, after difficulty has increased quite a bit, are people who were silent all these years when the content challenge stagnated (when the real massive power creep occurred), are people just now crusading against progression. Theres an obvious agenda here inherent in the crowd that does not want higher difficulty settings to reward players more. They claim they do not want to allow overlevel farming for instance, but they were perfectly fine with content challenge stagnating and best in slot loot coming out of normal - which is a direct contradiction in logic.


And yet... this power creep will happen for some players far faster than it happens for others. You will have some players still "stuck" on R1 while most groups are rolling through R10 like they were Legendary Elites. This will lead to a divide with some players saying Reaper is too hard, while others are begging for more challenge yet again. Maybe they'll just add R11-20 at that point? Add in Reaper TR?

This happens in every MMO. Might as well have stated water is wet. More progression will happen if and when it reaches that point.

DDO solves the "the highest setting is too difficult" issue with difficulty settings. If people think reaper is too difficult, they have 4 other settings to run on.


Don't get me wrong... I'm not against Reaper mode entirely. There are many issues with the game and the challenge of content for vets which I feel it does address. In fact, if they removed the Reaper Trees so that Reaper did not offer any additional power creep outside of the Reaper bonus to equipment, this would solve some of the issue. Even better would be if they cranked up Reaper 10 a few more notches so that no one would be able to complete it for years. That way, Reaper would be ahead of the power creep curve in a way it just isn't today. Maybe make Reaper 1 the equivalent of where R4 is right now and adjust the rest from there.

Removing reaper trees doesnt solve any issue. That power is only available in reaper. I could buy this argument if that power was available in NHE as well, but it isnt. Reaper difficulty with reaper trees is still more difficult than elite without reaper trees. Thus, power creep is a non issue here.

[goodspeed]

I feel reaper should give a first time completion of 200% You know cause hardness and stuff. You can murder the reaper xp in exchange lol.

[NaturalHazard]

Can you read at least? I said dev prefer casual to vets. If casual don't want reaper they can just ignore it, the game will be the same as before for them. What's your point again? But yeah as you said move on.

eh? so the devs like to play on casual?

[Vanhooger]

Perhaps we're having a language problem here.

Prefer means that they would build for the casuals. When you prefer something, you choose it first. Now, assuming we're not having a language barrier problem, can you show me where casuals are insisting that they need more challenge, or that they need more rewards to incentivize running the more challenging content?

Prefer (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/prefer)

Hopefully this alleviates your confusion, because repeating something that you've read on the internet doesn't make it accurate.


By your link: prefer --> to give priority, in this case to casual, from dev.

I never said casual post in this forum as casual don't even know the forum exist, and pick my language is an infraction, but bring it on mate.

Not everyone is native english speaker you know.

I say that because running R1 is easier then elite and more rewarding then doing r10, so yes for casual. Dev's like casual more then vets.





Prefer means that they would build for the casuals.



Yes, that's exactly what I meant. So no language problem, and using your own words, hopefully this alleviates your confusion

[Skunkhunt42]

eh? so the devs like to play on casual?

I don't think they can complete the groto...

[Vanhooger]

eh? so the devs like to play on casual?

What? Do you guys read what the OP is about?

[NaturalHazard]

What? Do you guys read what the OP is about?

Oh sorry so you mean they prefer the casual players over the hard core players? I thought for a second that you meant they prefer to play DDO on casual difficulty.

[Vanhooger]

Oh sorry so you mean they prefer the casual players over the hard core players? I thought for a second that you meant they prefer to play DDO on casual difficulty.

Yes I meant that. No problem dude.

[Forzah]

On the contrary, its a great argument. The fact that diverse opinions exist AND each persons money is just as green as the next persons, means each of those opinions is indeed equally valid. The forums said no to strengthening hard and elite, for years and years that idea was shouted down, so reaper was needed, as was new progression.

Knowing that diverse opinions on the forums exist, why do you keep referring to one opinion as if it is the opinion of the whole forums? The forums said no to strengthening hard and elite, but they also said yes to strengthening hard and elite. In similar fashion one could represent your opinion as "the forums", but that would be a gross generalization and rather misleading, wouldn't it?

[Gremmlynn]

Ultimately, it would have been far better for the game and the community if the DEVs would have simply rebalanced the HARD and ELITE settings rather than over-complicating the issue and introducing and entirely new difficulty mode. The changed to the Champions was good, and could have served as a good launching point to revamp ELITE to make it actually challenging again.Nope, that would have been disastrous as players would have had their BB snatched away and set beyond their ability to regain. Meeting customer demand for it was the reason hard and elite got easier in the first place.

[RoberttheBard]

By your link: prefer --> to give priority, in this case to casual, from dev.

I never said casual post in this forum as casual don't even know the forum exist, and pick my language is an infraction, but bring it on mate.

Not everyone is native english speaker you know.

I say that because running R1 is easier then elite and more rewarding then doing r10, so yes for casual. Dev's like casual more then vets.




Yes, that's exactly what I meant. So no language problem, and using your own words, hopefully this alleviates your confusion



Since no casuals were here insisting that we get Reaper, it only adds to my confusion how you could take the "they prefer casuals" stance. If they did prefer casuals, LE wouldn't be any harder than Heroic Casual. Did I miss something somewhere? Did they really dumb the game down that much, and when, because quite frankly, I've spent a lot of time in game lately, and I hadn't noticed that. Maybe something changed while I was asleep? I get it, I do, you've seen so many people saying it that despite the actual truth, this made up "fact" has to be true, right? So no, this claim doesn't make any sense whatsoever in context with Reaper.

[Vanhooger]

Since no casuals were here insisting that we get Reaper, it only adds to my confusion how you could take the "they prefer casuals" stance. If they did prefer casuals, LE wouldn't be any harder than Heroic Casual. Did I miss something somewhere? Did they really dumb the game down that much, and when, because quite frankly, I've spent a lot of time in game lately, and I hadn't noticed that. Maybe something changed while I was asleep? I get it, I do, you've seen so many people saying it that despite the actual truth, this made up "fact" has to be true, right? So no, this claim doesn't make any sense whatsoever in context with Reaper.

Alright.

[Muktuk]

I agree with the OP.

Reaper should be about the challenge. With the current system its just another "What's the most efficient way to grind XP?"