Trial LB suggestion

[Arionthe]

Currently we have class specific LB with rotating bosses in addition to the general LB. We currently have 3 bosses (5 in beta) where each class has different difficulties dealing with them. As such, certain boss becomes the ceiling for certain class, not to mention MAP RNG has major influences on how a trial attempt turns out.

Let me suggest a new Trial LB system.

Boss Specific Cumulative Achievements Leader Board.

Yes, as the name suggests, the LB breaks down by specific boss. The Boss LB can be filtered by class or all classes. The highest trial successfully completed grants points equal to (Trial level + 1) * 360 - actual time it took to complete that trial.

For example if someone finishes Boss Margoth trial 100 in 9'15", then that someone gets 360 * (100 + 1) - 555 = 35805 pts for the Margoth leaderboard.

The overall Trial LB will rank players by the combined Boss Specific points they accumulate from various Boss LBs. By doing away with rotating bosses, there is less "performance" gap between the same boss encounter (3 TL currently, 5 TL in the future). Now we can truly figure out who's the best at killing which boss.

This also helps with class balance, if that's a thing. Because weakness against one boss no longer masks a class's strength against other bosses.

Also differing boss mechanics (more the better) may challenge players to devise different strategies to eke out that last ounce of performance (more boss specific strategies and gear setup).

Some boss might prove to be a tougher challenge than others, the pts system can also dynamically adjust for that boss difference when ranking players. For example the highest trial cleared by a tough boss might only be 105 while an easier boss highest clear is 125. Then the pts from the tough boss can be scaled when calculating the final cumulative ranking. A simple way to approach this is taking the median boss trial (median toughness boss challenge), let's say 110, then normalize the score from the tough and easy boss so the contributions are roughly equal from each boss when calculating the final player ranking.

Finally how to make Map RNG less of a factor in trial completion.

Let's reduce the randonmess of mobs in trial. If we are going with Boss specific LBs, then for a particular boss, only certain type of mobs will appear in a trial map. For example, undead Boss will only have undead mobs etc. This reduces RNG, also makes build specialization more influential.


edit:
forgot to include but implied in the idea is that trials will also be boss specific. Meaning there is Margoth trial 99,100,101 etc. same with every other boss.

[Purple Potato]

Let's reduce the randonmess of mobs in trial. If we are going with Boss specific LBs, then for a particular boss, only certain type of mobs will appear in a trial map. For example, undead Boss will only have undead mobs etc. This reduces RNG, also makes build specialization more influential.

was +1 until this

[Arionthe]

Let's keep the focus on the main theme of Boss Specific LB. The big problem this solves is that issue with one particular boss will NOT hold up your progress with other bosses. Although I'm not in beta, a recurring theme has been Kara's a tough nut to crack for BH and Mage while comparatively easier with warrior.

As for the other idea.... seems like Purple Potato you enjoy hunting for that perfect map of non elites and no healers... I'd rather have more consistency of the map challenge so I can be more strategic about the approach. But that's just where we differ. Let's focus on the agreement and table the disagreement for later. So upvote the idea.... even with reservations.

[Purple Potato]

Let's keep the focus on the main theme of Boss Specific LB. The big problem this solves is that issue with one particular boss will NOT hold up your progress with other bosses. Although I'm not in beta, a recurring theme has been Kara's a tough nut to crack for BH and Mage while comparatively easier with warrior.

seems like Purple Potato you enjoy hunting for that perfect map of non elites and no healers... I'd rather have more consistency of the map challenge so I can be more strategic about the approach.

Rather the opposite. Since all top trials are so map dependant, if you only have skeleton knights and revenants (or something non-ranged) on the map, then mage will never get anywhere close to passing it. If it has skeleton archers and revenants, then it just becomes the same game of "find the map with skeleton archers only".

[Coda]

At one point I suggested some LB variations, for example:

• Speed Run LB for every TL#, broken out by class since BH have big advantage

Many people have also suggested greatly improved stats from Trials.

I realize these two are off topic compared to your OP, but...

If you go back and read the zillion suggestions, something like 0.00001% of them ever get implemented, so it's kinda pointless.

P.S. Arionthe your suggestions are always well thought out, and even though I don't always agree with them, I very much appreciate reading them and wish Devs would implement more of our ideas.

[Vwdriver]

I'll Chime in....

I'm all for making the TL maps less random, but I believe the map should consists of a standard mix of mobs, followed by the boss. I would suggest that TL mobs should be generated using a standard "recipe". 1 cup of skeletons, 1 cup of liches, 1 table spoon of healers, etc.... Even number of each mob type.

Map geography is equally as important... no so much for bosses that move around, but for stationary bosses (dragons) getting a map with lots of rocks, etc... can make it a real PITA to complete the trial on time. In fact, bad geography can complete mess up a trial run.

Third point: MAP xp gained I believe needs to be adjusted. I have noticed that maps with healer heavy mobs tend to give map xp faster and therefore make it easier to complete a TL. Not sure if anyone else has picked up on this or not. Those friggin' elite zombies that have a bazzillion HP don't give any more XP than an elite skeleton archer which falls much quicker I found. Maybe they do, but not enough to make up for lost time blasting away at them.

A trial is a test, and it would be more fair if the test was the same or very close to the same for everyone.

VW.

[Arionthe]

If we accept that different bosses will present different challenges (boss mechanics) to different builds, then we accept that different builds will have varying success against those bosses. That in itself isn't a bad thing.

Currently both Mage and BH are topping out around TL 122. People take that as evidence as two classes are balanced despite the fact each have distinct strengths (mob damage for mage) and weakness (boss damage for mage). I think differently. Perfect class balance shouldn't be the goal because it is entirely too difficult to achieve without making every class just the reskin of another. Classes should be generally balanced, the emphasis on general.

Imagine we have three bosses and each class is especially effective against one (but not the same one for all three classes), terrible against one, and mediocre against the third. That's perfect, as that demonstrates class balance AND distinctiveness.

The motivating force behind this idea of boss specific LB is to drive home the point that classes shouldn't be equally effective against all bosses. I know we are all competitive and secretly wish our favorite class is the @#$#. But we can't please everyone as long as we are playing different classes/builds. Let's say warriors suck wind, as is the generally accepted wisdom atm, but what if warrior is especially well equipped to deal with a certain boss (beta Kara seems to be the one atm) and thus opens up a reasonable gap between itself and mage/bh on this particular boss LB. That will go a long way to mollify the long suffering warrior fan-base without necessitating buffs and god forbid, nerfs to other classes for the sake of class balance.

This encourages and rewards diversity, and lessen the howls of the "unwashed masses/underprivileged/ Orion 's common refrain".

So I see the boss specific LB achieve two goals simultaneously. One it allows a finer differentiation between the best and the 2nd best (performance gap can be discerned in smaller increments since every incremental achievement (single TL advancement against any boss) is now recorded and there for all to see). Two it rewards build diversity by illuminating class strengths in ways the current LB will mask (for example 115 Kara becomes hard ceiling for mage when 125 elban is nothing to the same mage).

Now back to why I think limiting mob variety during trial is a good thing. The perfect map, according to Purple Potato , is all non elite skeleton archers. Let's say there are 10 possible mob types in a trial and 15 mobs generated per map. So for that mystical perfect map, you have 0.1^15 chance to get it. Obviously the actual chance is higher since you don't need the full 15 mobs to be skeleton archers since 12 mobs will summon the boss blah blah. This isn't college statistics so we won't go into a discourse on probabilities. The point here is that it is a very low chance. Top LB attempts are made based on finding that perfect map. That's a lot of wasted attempts/time, not exactly indicative of skill. So the solution is the mage trials should be all skeleton archers, non elite.... ehh not really a solution since Devs wanted the mob phase to be part of the challenge. If we are just going to give each class the easiest mob they can deal with, why not drop the mob phase entirely and just have the boss fights..

So what to do? My vote is to reduce the mob variety for each boss. Let me go back to my original statement that started this post.

"If we accept that different bosses will present different challenges (boss mechanics) to different builds, then we accept that different builds will have varying success against those bosses. That in itself isn't a bad thing."

Yes I just did that. I quoted myself during the same post.

Think of the mob phase of a trial just the extension of the boss fight. With Boss specific LB, each class doesn't have to be world beaters against every single boss in order to still stand as the champion of all. Thus if we accept varying performance against the bosses themselves, we should have no problem accepting varying performance against bosses' henchmen. In the end they all balance/even out anyway (across all the boss/henchmen combinations).

Now the mob phase of each trial can be specific, drastically reducing the map RNG, and make "skills great again".

For Margoth, just look at SoA map, have mobs from that map being possible mobs during trial.

For TBD, look at the TBD story map, have mobs from that map being possible mobs during trial..

For Elban, same thing.

That just seems logical.

P.S. Coda Appreciate your comment about my posts in general. Despite what some thinks, my suggestions for the game are just that.. suggestions that I think will make the game better in general, not to the benefit of a particular class. Hopefully people can read my posts without prejudice; otherwise, it is easy to miss my point(s) entirely.

[Suzy.Bae]

If we accept that different bosses will present different challenges (boss mechanics) to different builds, then we accept that different builds will have varying success against those bosses. That in itself isn't a bad thing..................

If ever you want to suggest that Devs get rid of too much RNG rolls for trials, then there will be way too much time required/trial and error involved in order to know what to balance out for map rolls. It can be so easy for some classes and harder for others. It can be a cake walk or an impossible task in some cases as well. At the rate at which Devs are doing things and their need to acquire information/help from players through open and closed beta, this is a Herculean feat to balance out.

There are other games that share the same trick when beating trial achievements and that's because it's not really that easy to win near default/defaulted map rolls. In that case, it's either you beat it or not in which case there's no more need for RNG, if balanced for each respective classes, then that should be a good option instead.

P.S. There's an impending rebalancing update and there's too much stuff that needs to be considered before even looking at this suggestion as far as I'm concerned. Good idea/points for some though.