***Official PvE Progression V2***

[sofiebear]

Grats to you guys!!

[KeyboardNinja]

Ciphas down in NiM. Yay some progress. >_<

 

Grats! The third phase is all about keeping circles out of the middle and tanking the adds. (oh, and also keeping the tanks topped off for the big spikes) It's much less frantic than the first phase. Go get em!

[MiralukaJedi]

Grats! The third phase is all about keeping circles out of the middle and tanking the adds. (oh, and also keeping the tanks topped off for the big spikes) It's much less frantic than the first phase. Go get em!

 

I think we would have had third phase if the top two DPS hadn't been dead already.

 

I got doom, ran through the puddles to clense it, and got jumped and stranged RIGHT before the heal to clense the damage went away.

 

I was also the first doom <.<

 

Not sure how Kiteera died, but at that point we knew it was over but just wanted to beat our record so the other two DPS murdered Ciphas.

 

I remember joking "Welp, now the odds of someone cheating doom have gone up" (Operative can't cheat it). Then Kit died and I went "nevermind" (Kit being a sniper)

[Kiteera]

I remember joking "Welp, now the odds of someone cheating doom have gone up" (Operative can't cheat it). Then Kit died and I went "nevermind" (Kit being a sniper)

 

Yeah, I think that's when lag was a bit worse than other times, and I mis-timed my covered escape for doom. o.x Before that point I got pretty good with it! >.<

[Cherubaum]

New Outriders

Golden Fury HM 16m

[KeyboardNinja]

So, 2.4 is coming with two new Hard Modes, which raises the question: how do we want to count progression on this thread? It's confusing enough right now with two separate progression instances; post-2.4, there will be *4*. Do we retire the Nightmare Modes entirely from the progression scale? Do we count them, but at a lower tier? It sounds like most of the HM bosses are quite a bit easier than the old NiM bosses, so that doesn't seem particularly representative.

 

Several months ago, Bombbuster proposed going with a Harbinger-style progression board. For those of you who haven't seen it, I highly recommend you check it out: http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=672500 Basically, every instance is ranked individually, with boss counts simply colored in a progress-bar style list. When Bombbuster originally mooted this idea, I'm ashamed to say that I lobbied against it. I've gone completely the other direction now. I think this is a really good way of recording progression, and it gives guilds appropriate prominence for clearing hard content. For example, if a guild had cleared NiM S&V but hadn't even touched Writhing Horror, I want to know about it and I want the server to know about them. A single, linear list is always going to struggle with this situation.

 

Anyway, thoughts? If we do change the progression thread format, I don't think it should be changed until 2.4 drops. Changing things now while we're still racing for firsts isn't really fair to anyone.

[ML_DoubleTap]

Honestly for most it's probably going to be the first groups that enter the instance. Progression tracking on hardmodes that drop existing gear is tough cuz it's more about group availability than accomplishment.

 

I don't really have an opinion on format, just my $0.02

[Cookiackus]

Actually the New HM Ops will drop a new tier of gear (78 Orconion Gear or something) so it would be actual progression this time around. The current versions on the PTS actually are quite a challenge, there are some easy bosses but there are some really hard bosses as well. I would probably actually say we should track progression on this if they leave it as is, but if they nerf the hell out of it then no. Just my thoughts.

[KeyboardNinja]

Actually the New HM Ops will drop a new tier of gear (78 Orconion Gear or something) so it would be actual progression this time around. The current versions on the PTS actually are quite a challenge, there are some easy bosses but there are some really hard bosses as well. I would probably actually say we should track progression on this if they leave it as is, but if they nerf the hell out of it then no. Just my thoughts.

 

Right, but there are guilds that are 8/10 on the new content on the PTS and still only 2/7 in S&V NiM (despite S&V being out for almost four times as long). That seems like a pretty strong indication that the hard modes are going to fall before the nightmare modes do on our server, and the nightmare modes will remain challenging. Obviously, the new tier of gear is going to reduce the difficulty of the current nightmare modes by quite a bit, and that's quite depressing, but I don't think it's going to bring them down to the point where everyone will be farming titles.

 

Even if we're just considering the two HMs though, that's still two instances. I would be very, very opposed to proceeding under a linear listing as we have done in the past. A score system and a Harbinger-style split list are really the only other options that I know of, and the score system has been decried as both too complex and potentially favoring some guilds over others (a fair point). So, that leaves the split list.

[Bombbuster]

Thanks for bringing this up TAM, I'd like to hear from more guilds.

 

Edit: scratch that, posts came in while I was typing. I'll keep tracking this and propose something when we get closer. If the new content drops 78 gear but is actually easier than TFB/S&V NiM then it's going to be a mess and the only thing I can think to do would be to have 4 different lists, one for each op. However if they are harder (or if Bioware jacks up the difficulty when they go live), then it should just be deciding which one is harder for: FullClear1 > FullClear2 > Total number of bosses in both ranking.

 

One other note on a different issue. Since it is possible that two different guilds could each get a server first clear on TFB NiM and S&V NiM we should establish a ranking. For example: Guild x clears TFB NiM and then guild Y also clears it. Later, both guilds are also 6/7 in S&V when guild Y clears the last boss, followed by guild x. Both have cleared all the content and each have a server first full clear. My thinking is that a full S&V NiM clear would take preference over a full TFB NiM clear. Guilds who have cleared both on other servers claim that the last boss in S&V NiM is harder than the last boss in TFB NiM.

 

I'm not set on one way or the other, I just want to get it hashed out ahead of time in case it happens. Chime in with your thoughts on both issues at hand.

Edited September 20, 2013 by Bombbuster

[sofiebear]

I would love to see either a Harbinger style or a "prettier" version like they do on Shadowlands. I feel until the titles become farm status, there's no reason to take them off the list. The NIM ops are still an accomplishment to strive for on our little server and we should give recognition to anyone who plans on going for it! But new content should always take priority for the top of the list.

 

Perhaps to de-clutter the list if we were to switch the formatting, make a "pre-2.0" section within a spoiler so the first post isn't too long when you're scrolling down? Putting things like KP, EV, EC, 10 stack Dread Tooth, Golden Fury, etc in it?

 

Edit: It would definitely eliminate that type of issue with a simple reformatting. Though people can claim one to be harder than the other, both are still an accomplishment. I feel they shouldn't be compared in that way. It opens up too much rooms for future frustrations and arguments.

Edited September 20, 2013 by sofiebear

[Shakell]

I would also like to see a Shadowlands style progression listing, it would clearly display who killed what boss first in what instance, while simultaneously taking away the need to squabble over what kills should count more. It would keep the strengths of the "linear" system we are currently using, but remove most of the hassles by separating by instances, which by their current nature are linear.

 

Technically, we could squabble over what instances should go higher relative to each other, but I agree Wisteria that newer content should be listed higher. Everyone who has touched current nightmare content understands the difficulty and will give it the respect it deserves. Anyone who hasn't and doesn't understand what is involved, would probably still not understand even if it were listed first.

 

If we were to switch formatting, I think it would be fair to either spoiler all of the pre-2.0 progression or erase it completely, at Bombbuster's discretion. The formatting change (with essentially a separate list for each op), would eliminate most of the problems that have been brought up in regards to this thread, and would be more appealing to me personally.

[sofiebear]

If we do use a Shadowlands-esque formatting... can we just use prettier colors?

[KeyboardNinja]

I'm definitely leery of putting FullClear1 > FullClear2 > NumberOfBosses for the next set of content. As I've said, it's not a particularly well-balanced system from a mathematical standpoint. It has the advantage of simplicity, but I think it's really attacking the wrong problem. Specifically, the problem it's attacking is "How do we rank progress in two vectors (two instances) on a single scale?" If we absolutely must have a single linear list, then I agree with Bombbuster's proposal. I don't think we need a single list though. Or rather, I don't think a single list needs to be the primary thing.

 

Here's a compromise suggestion: we use harbinger (or shadowlands) style separated lists at the top of the post, and then maintain a linear list below it similar to how things are right now. The linear list can be ordered according to Bombbuster's scheme (which works reasonably well for the purpose), while the separated lists have an obvious ordering. Instances can be ordered by the priority of full clear used in the linear list. The downside to this is it is somewhat more work for Bombbuster to setup, and it adds an extra step any time he updates the progression list. I would also be fine with just the separated lists.

 

I just think that the linear ranking inherently loses too much information. For example, if Aisthesis clears NiM TfB, we would be on top of the linear list according to the ranking scheme. However, UWA has a very real chance of clearing Thrasher before we do. They would be ranked below us by the rules of the thread, but I frankly don't feel this is any more fair than having them ranked above us for the same feat. If you're ahead of all the other guilds in an instance, you should be at the top of *some* list. Having multiple instances but only one list leads to these sorts of issues.

 

Regarding clear priority, for now I would say NiM S&V should have priority over NiM TfB. Most guilds agree that Styrak is the hardest of the Nightmare bosses, at least the first time you encounter it. Thrasher is also considered exceptionally difficult. Also, far more guilds have cleared NiM TfB than have cleared NiM S&V. For those reasons, I would lend more personal credence to a clear of S&V than a clear of TfB. I can't say what the clear priority should be for the new ops since I have been rabidly avoiding spoilers. I'm sure we'll have some idea though once things go live.

[Bombbuster]

As I mentioned, I'm not deadest on one way or the other. I'd rather get a consensus from the Ebon Hawk progression guilds, but we need more guilds to weigh in.

 

Current points:

Specifically, the problem it's attacking is "How do we rank progress in two vectors (two instances) on a single scale?" If we absolutely must have a single linear list, then I agree with Bombbuster's proposal. I don't think we need a single list though. Or rather, I don't think a single list needs to be the primary thing.

Splitting up the progression into multiple lists, specifically one list for each operation, is a viable option and maybe our only option if the tier 78 progression ops are easy enough for guilds to clear on week one despite being only 6/12 in TFB/S&V NiM. However, do we really want afford bragging rights, prestige, or whatever we want to call it to server firsts DF and DP if it's just a matter of who logs on first? I dunno, maybe <shrug>, but it just seems to cheapen the value of some of the very significant progression accomplishments, like timed runs, etc, if each is listed separately but equally.

 

Again, it may all be moot if Bioware dials up the difficulty knob when 2.4 goes live, nerfs TFB/S&V NiM, or some combination of both. Additionally I not sure how significant the TFB/S&V NiM clears and timed runs will be if we can easily farm 78 gear from easier ops.

 

So yeah, I'm very on the fence, and hate Bioware for doing this to progression ops.

Here's a compromise suggestion: we use harbinger (or shadowlands) style separated lists at the top of the post, and then maintain a linear list below it similar to how things are right now. The linear list can be ordered according to Bombbuster's scheme (which works reasonably well for the purpose), while the separated lists have an obvious ordering. Instances can be ordered by the priority of full clear used in the linear list. The downside to this is it is somewhat more work for Bombbuster to setup, and it adds an extra step any time he updates the progression list. I would also be fine with just the separated lists.

It would only be extra work to set it up, maintaining it would still be nearly as easy. if that's what we decide to do, of course.

I just think that the linear ranking inherently loses too much information. For example, if Aisthesis clears NiM TfB, we would be on top of the linear list according to the ranking scheme. However, UWA has a very real chance of clearing Thrasher before we do. They would be ranked below us by the rules of the thread, but I frankly don't feel this is any more fair than having them ranked above us for the same feat. If you're ahead of all the other guilds in an instance, you should be at the top of *some* list. Having multiple instances but only one list leads to these sorts of issues.

I hear you, but having multiple lists creates the new issue of having too much 'noise', and the important information getting lost in what will be a *huge* wall of text.

[MrOscarMonster]

I'm with Wisteria on this. The shadowlands version is very nice. Easy to read and understand, and the separated rankings are very nice. Frankly, if we used the shadowlands format, I don't even think the order we put TfB, SnV, DP, DF in would matter much, since it's so dang easy to read. Perhaps we could add a section that tracks total progression boss kills at the bottom. This way there is still a tracking system that indicates overall progression with a simple score out of twenty.

 

and something about niceness and whatnot:

[KeyboardNinja]

Splitting up the progression into multiple lists, specifically one list for each operation, is a viable option and maybe our only option if the tier 78 progression ops are easy enough for guilds to clear on week one despite being only 6/12 in TFB/S&V NiM. However, do we really want afford bragging rights, prestige, or whatever we want to call it to server firsts DF and DP if it's just a matter of who logs on first? I dunno, maybe <shrug>, but it just seems to cheapen the value of some of the very significant progression accomplishments, like timed runs, etc, if each is listed separately but equally.

 

I totally agree on your points here. Listing them separately though avoids the issue you raise. People can look at the list and see that <Random Noobs> (not a real guild) got server first in both HMs but hasn't cleared a single NiM boss. They can make up their mind about prestige from there. If someone looks at the lists and isn't aware of the meaning of an achievement, well, then there's not much we can do for them anyway.

 

Incidentally, on the multiple lists thing, one of the things I was thinking about was ways of recording server firsts for individual bosses. This is actually quite easily accomplished through the use of colors. The shadowlands list uses red and green to denote whether or not a boss has been cleared. It's easy enough to introduce another color (say, blue) which indicates the boss was a server first. Still order the list by number of bosses cleared, but this allows achievements to be recorded even for guilds that don't end up on top. It also makes server first bosses and server first clears extremely easy to see at a glance.

[Roatha]

Think the majority of the problem here, aside from the lack of diverse guilds commenting, is that until 2.4 drops, and we see the actual scale of difficulty on the two new ops, compared to what they are right now, it'll be impossible to rank them. In all honesty if they don't adjust them significantly from what they are now, I'd be seriously dissapointed in a few of the guilds on this server if the only reason they didn't clear both in a single night was due to time constraints. I can also already see the hell that'll follow on these forums if someone does do that early on the day it's released. Subsequently, 20 odd pieces of 78 tier gear, dumped on say 4 dps (depending on non-token pieces) could probably make pretty short work of a lot of the current NiM content and allow that guild, should they raid again the next night, to progres substantially farther then they otherwise could have.

 

Ordering itself has never really been relevant to me, who killed what first seemed inconsequential. Who cleared what first was the only thing that I've ever looked at and was the competative nature behind which I've worked in a progression environment through numerous mmo's. More so with multiple ops/raids available because the idea to progress was to gear. Bosses were designed, or supposed to be designed, to be more challenging as you went on, not get easier and as such switching ops/raids to clear earlier bosses in each to gear was how you progressed. Which is why for me personally, if guild A went into ops A and killed the first boss, it meant about as little as Guild B going into ops B and killing the first boss there. Either way you looked at it, they both killed a boss, the time stamp on it was the only thing that would be relevant at that point.

 

Now if Guild B then went to ops A and killed the first boss there and Guild A called it for the night? yeah, 2 to 1... Guild B obviously has progressed farther. If we're going to try the, List the ops, then list guilds based on how far in that ops that are, it honestly won't matter to much to me. I tended to view this post more as a place folks could look and see how the server was doing progression wise, (though it's been a little lacking of late) and also allowing each guild to list quite clearly what they had accomplished. If a guild clears an entire op first, everyone who's running progression is going to be aware that that guild cleared it first regardless of the setup we use, so it would come down to how much work Gascar's willing to put in to this for all of us lol.

 

That being said, I do want to second or third the pew pew on Bioware for sticking a higher tier of gear in the new HM's then what's currently available in the NiM. Though, I'll always view NiM content as being the more defining level of progression over HM's regardless of what tier gear drops in the ops. TFB HM was no EC NiM, I suspect, unfortuantely, that we'll see the same thing here.

[RynZelara]

Yeah I also am very against what BW is doing with the gear. S&V NiM dropped what, 2 months ago or something? It'll be less than half a year before a new tier of gear comes out. From a player perspective, that's fantastic. It means more shinies for people to get at faster rates.....

 

......if the content were designed for the average player in the first place. That's where the problem is. If BW was gonna do something like this, then the NiM OPs should've been more accessible to average players. But then the inverse becomes a problem, where the content is too easy and people start complaining that there's no sense of accomplishment.

 

As it stands, not very many guilds (or players, as I'm starting to find) are capable of running NiM progression. And I'm not talking about WH, because any HM capable team will, in time, be able to clear that with relative ease, as evidenced by the multitude of WH NiM clears. So, because of this, the 75 gear is pretty difficult to obtain. It's an accomplishment, it means something. People see 75 gear on a character and go "Wow, they must be pretty decent to be able to get that much 75 gear." At least, that's usually what happens in my experience, barring trolls or ignorant people (which can't be helped).

 

But now, as Bombuster and Roatha have said, the current difficulty of the new OPs is not in line with the gear it drops. If they are currently easy enough for a team in full 72 gear to clear, thereby giving them TWO tiers of gear higher, then what even is the point of the current NiM OPs in the first place? We'd all basically just be wasting our time right now clearing stuff that's gonna become abysmally easy once 78 gear drops.

 

Now, as has been mentioned, this is all assuming that BW goes live with the new OPs as they currently are. But really, even if they bump the difficulty up, they'd have to make it harder than TFB and SV NiM to justify the gear increase. Even equal difficulty wouldn't justify it because then the current NiM OPs still become obsolete from a progression standpoint and a gearing standpoint, since the new OPs will offer what the current OPs is offering in terms of difficulty, except with better rewards.

 

In my opinion, the new HM OPs should have been a mirror to the current NiM OPs, in that they are about equal in difficulty (maybe just a smidge easier to encourage people to do new content) and drop 75 gear as well. Then people could choose which they wanted to progress on, and keeping a progression list would have been much easier as there would be no squabble over drastically less difficulty, AND the gear dropped from the new OPs wouldn't diminish the difficulty of the current OPs and make them easier to clear, since they would be dropping the same gear. This would allow BW to introduce a new gear tier with the NiM versions of the new OPs, while still making 75 gear accessible and relevant to more than just the hardcore raider. The only problem with THIS approach is that people will start complaining that the game is moving too slow, and that more gear needs to come out.

 

I dunno, I simply type what I'm thinking sometimes. This was my 2 cents on the whole matter.

[Cookiackus]

I agree with the gear problem that will occur with the new operations. I know from my guilds stand point, if we start getting 78 gear we are going to tear through stuff that we are on the cusp of now pretty easily and that really sucks. Most nightmare clears coming after the new operations will come down to whether guilds have the time to run both the new HMs and the NiM stuff. It really sucks to be honest but there is not much we can do about it. Post new operation clears of NiM will be more prestigious in my opinion at this point.

[RynZelara]

I agree with the gear problem that will occur with the new operations. I know from my guilds stand point, if we start getting 78 gear we are going to tear through stuff that we are on the cusp of now pretty easily and that really sucks. Most nightmare clears coming after the new operations will come down to whether guilds have the time to run both the new HMs and the NiM stuff. It really sucks to be honest but there is not much we can do about it. Post new operation clears of NiM will be more prestigious in my opinion at this point.

 

Yeah it does suck. All the work we're putting into NiM right now is basically for nothing if BW goes live with the new OPs as they are.

 

I know that's how MMOs usually go, but it still sucks. =/

[KeyboardNinja]

I agree with the gear problem that will occur with the new operations. I know from my guilds stand point, if we start getting 78 gear we are going to tear through stuff that we are on the cusp of now pretty easily and that really sucks. Most nightmare clears coming after the new operations will come down to whether guilds have the time to run both the new HMs and the NiM stuff. It really sucks to be honest but there is not much we can do about it. Post new operation clears of NiM will be more prestigious in my opinion at this point.

 

I feel pretty much the same way. I'm sure that, post-2.4, it'll only be a few weeks before both UWA and Aisthesis are titled and sitting pretty. We already clear the first four bosses in TfB with 40 minutes to spare on the title; with 78s it will be a comparative walk in the park.

 

With that said, I don't think the experience will be universal. Sure, a lot of guilds will pick up a few more nightmare bosses. Dread Guard isn't that terrible, and a little extra gear on your healers and tanks goes a long way. Op IX is a straight mechanics check even now, with gear playing very little role. Styrak is similar. I doubt that we're going to see a title bonanza once 2.4 drops.

 

Just think about EC NiM. Even though we now out gear it by *four* tiers and out level the content by five levels, some of the mechanics still pose a threat. If your tanks couldn't execute on Kephess pre-2.0, they won't now. Despite the relative triviality of the content, only a handful of groups have gone and picked up the Warstalker title. TfB and S&V will be like that, but even more so.

[Cookiackus]

I feel pretty much the same way. I'm sure that, post-2.4, it'll only be a few weeks before both UWA and Aisthesis are titled and sitting pretty. We already clear the first four bosses in TfB with 40 minutes to spare on the title; with 78s it will be a comparative walk in the park.

 

With that said, I don't think the experience will be universal. Sure, a lot of guilds will pick up a few more nightmare bosses. Dread Guard isn't that terrible, and a little extra gear on your healers and tanks goes a long way. Op IX is a straight mechanics check even now, with gear playing very little role. Styrak is similar. I doubt that we're going to see a title bonanza once 2.4 drops.

 

Just think about EC NiM. Even though we now out gear it by *four* tiers and out level the content by five levels, some of the mechanics still pose a threat. If your tanks couldn't execute on Kephess pre-2.0, they won't now. Despite the relative triviality of the content, only a handful of groups have gone and picked up the Warstalker title. TfB and S&V will be like that, but even more so.

 

I agree that most guilds still will not be able to full clear nightmare content but I was more talking about progression. Its going to cheapen every nightmare kill after the new tier of gear comes out, just sucks after putting so much work into it that the value is lessened. I hate progression that becomes more of a time race then anything. But we will have 3 months in total to complete the content so I guess that is a fair amount of time, I just wish the new Ops dropped 75 instead of 78, that would have kept it more fun.

[Airam]

I agree that most guilds still will not be able to full clear nightmare content but I was more talking about progression. Its going to cheapen every nightmare kill after the new tier of gear comes out, just sucks after putting so much work into it that the value is lessened. I hate progression that becomes more of a time race then anything. But we will have 3 months in total to complete the content so I guess that is a fair amount of time, I just wish the new Ops dropped 75 instead of 78, that would have kept it more fun.

 

Completely agree. However, I think that all the guilds on this server are underperforming the time content expectations. Would we really be so upset if we had either already cleared at least one nightmare mode or had made deeper inroads into both? I don't ask out of spite or elitism; I know that <Aisthesis>'s summer schedule was somewhat ****ed up, and UWA had a lot of changes as well. I estimate that <Aisthesis> lost at least two weeks' worth of raiding time due to vacations, school and life events. Things have calmed down a lot now, but I feel that as a guild we're still hopelessly behind that sweet spot where it's exciting that new content is coming out but also manageable with the content we're still trying to clear.

 

If the new nightmare modes drop in three months and we haven't cleared all the current content plus the new ops, I'm gonna be pretty worried.

 

ETA: I know that Tam, Daharel and Ros have already weighed in, but I am definitely in favor of Harbinger's system with further coloring for server firsts. Even if <Random Noobs> gets a server first kill because they logged in at 12:00 after a patch, that's still a feather in someone's cap that I don't begrudge them. One of my proudest moments was putting together a scrub guild group at the last minute (people who weren't even in any progression team) and killing Dash'roode HM.

 

PS <Random Noobs> is totally going to be a guild now.

Edited September 23, 2013 by Airam

[VarekRayth]

Kels to 62% on our best pull, Ciphas dropping consistently...

 

We'll get those bastards before 2.4