TERA: Rise of The Fallen?



  • GardoVdl wrote: »
    They just need to bring back PvP. Not playing again until it comes back grinding 20+ a dungeon daily so i can blow away it all on rng enchantment is not my thing.

    This is basically the game now... run your daily's and try the enchantment lottery. A lot of things could be mitigated if players were able to trade all enchanting materials as more top-tier players could farm materials to earn profit while increasing activity of veteran and top-tier players. Simply, the economy is suffering because most items are untradable and the rng is sucking the profitability of this game dry. The only way to earn a steady income is to run IoD which is mind-numbing. In the golden days, almost all items were tradable... there's a reason why people often reflect on the previous state of the game.
    Please merge this thread with the other Feedback thread and pin it, so that we can continue posting on it and it's not forgotten about, thank you.
  • ElinLoveElinLove ✭✭✭✭
    I see I'm not the only one who shares the opinion of dungeon simulators/Learning Ace dungeons and such. Great to see this idea lives on at least somewhat.

    To be fair I kinda agree with almost everything on your list, except 2 things:
    1: How an end-game area should have a darker and imposing feel. It was like this with Kaiator and surroundings and... meh. I frankly like the tone on Highwatch and the continent it's on, it's a good balance of nice scenario, good feel and it's neither imposing nor cutesy. Could be said to be a tad bland, this I agree. But it's not exaggerated in any direction.
    2: BGs being limited to like 3 main ones and one mini-game and call it a day. I don't see the quantity as a reason for their bad state right now, I understand entirely the point of fragmenting playerbase, and that's kinda the reason why dungeons get rotated and not just all added and left there, but then again if we see how CS went down: 1st point was locking Lv 30+ out of it. Sounded oh-so-great no noobs!!! Until people saw Lv 65s are as stupid as Lv 30s, and queues where just slower now (which in turn makes a snowball: since it's slow, less people bother queuing, making it slower). 2nd point was the decreasing rewards on it and constant exploiting during some time (through gate glitches and such). Ends up on a BG only played on power hours, the only moment it's rewarding enough to justify the bet, and when people all queue due to the former reason. That's also the case for all the other Lv 65 ones, dare I say for the exact same reasons.

    The rest I agree completely. Optimization shouldn't even be something we request, it should have been worked out years ago, it's quite vexing it's still a thing, class balance is beyond stupid, to think a developer knows it has what, 5 versions to deal with (NA, EU, RU, KR, JP, or did I miss/add something?), that in fact give it money, and only balances based on ONE, knowing the rest is different, is blatantly re-tar-ded (blame the word filter). Same with ping dependency issues.

    It's truly sad that we all share great ideas around here, and post them openly for everyone to see including staff, as far as staff's words are concerned they even pass along our feedback and suggestions, but then, the Korean developer just spits on our face and ignores us like we were trash.
  • Elinu1Elinu1 ✭✭✭
    some good suggestions, too bad they will end up in bhs trash bin.
  • ElinUsagiElinUsagi ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 11
    Elinu1 wrote: »
    some good suggestions, too bad they will end up in bhs trash bin.

    1.1k views and only 32 likes and 21 replies, no wonder why good things like this end up in bhs trash bin, most of the people that have seen this thread didn't post or vote it up.

    Do you expect publishers or devs will put interest in something when we don't give it the relevance it could get?
  • edited January 11
    @DUCKIPUTZ Very true.
    @Meshak I understand where you're coming from. Basically you want to experience all higher-end content but with less damage, hp and defense etc. The reward being all the same but significantly lower. That's interesting. Although, you still need to be able to understand the class you're playing among various of things.

    @ElinLove Yeah, personally I like more of a darker feel for example Val Kaeli.
    There's a lot of issues to why PvP is not where it should be, for sure. I agree CS should of stayed 30+, maybe even giving lower level players a buff to equalize the missing skills. Exploiting should be a lot more stricter when it comes to both PvP and PvE

    Thank you for commenting it's good reading others point of view and similar ideas. It's unfortunate what Bluehole is doing, but maybe there is light at the end of the tunnel.
    Thank you @ElinUsagi and the others for trying, maybe things will get better.
  • It is certainly true you cannot really know your class when you only get to run easy content. This is why I think experiencing the same mechanics at a lower setting would be so beneficial. Having the same mechanics available to lower tier players (which will probably be either be newer (or return) or casual players) in an easier dungeon acts as a bridge for these players into end game content.

    It would, I hope, ease the frustration of established players and give confidence to less experienced players. If it could be married with some sort of banner at the end showing what your dps was and what your dps should look like, or the average dps of your class with the same gear (doesn't have to be party wide, just a class banner) this would help. For instance something like the damage chart kritika has where you can see what your most used skills are and how much damage they do. Since there is a relationship with essential manna now, there could be some sort of link suggesting for help visit essential manna to look for damage or rotation tips.

    I would think this could be beneficial to everyone, although I can see how it could make end game too easy with allowing everyone a way to figure out end game mechanics on "easy mode".

    I would think it would be easiest from a development standpoint to lower damage and hp of bosses by a certain % and call them ims or lfg dungeons. This is why it was the first suggestion. However, if there is a desire to not allow an easy mode of end game content, two things spring to mind.

    Create an easy dungeon with different bosses who have similar mechanics to end game but lower hp and damage, this will allow people to practice or get familiar with mechanics without doing the actual end game dungeon. It could be a crucible type dungeon with every type of mechanic available.

    Or, If putting a new dungeon together is too much, just don't have the ims and lfg dungeons match end game. We sort of rotate end game dungeons anyway. Just have the ims and lfg dungeons be the previous set of dungeons for a month until everyone has figured out the harder 3 and 4*'s then change the ims and lfg dungeons to match the 3 and 4*. This would also make it seem like there is more content in tera by having more dungeons available even if they are easier.

    It may even pave the way for bringing back older dungeons people thought were fun in an easier mode so more people can experience them.
    edited January 12
    I am sorry but PvP does not sell costumes.

    So we have to live with it...
  • ElinUsagiElinUsagi ✭✭✭✭✭
    HLK76PFWXT wrote: »
    I am sorry but PvP does not sell costumes.

    So we have to live with it...

    It does, but why to pvp to get gold and buy costumes if you could be unlucky and be matched on the loser team most of the times and then get the same gold in one hour of pvp than you will get on a 5 minutes dungeon?

    PvPers also likes to get costumes, accesories and weapon skins but like PvEers not everyone can afford to spend money and they need to resort to trade their gold or stuff to get them but a PvPer will need maybe 10 times more the time to get enought gold of stuff to trade for those cash shop items than a PvEer.

    There is were we need to find some balance in PvP content and PvE content, so both can be equally worth to try for both kind of players.
  • BonbonnieBonbonnie ✭✭✭
    edited January 12
    TERA needs to take a lot of pointers front Guild Wars 2. You get rewards for map/quest completion. (ex: clear all quests in a certain zone, get special crafting and cosmetic stuff) As well as GW2's skin system where you can apply a certain armor look to any piece you have. I know TERA had this a long time ago before Fashion Coupons, and I must agree with people who said FCs are limiting, as some chest pieces look good while the gloves or bottoms look horrid. Until then, GW2 is my go to mmo. Good community, active events on all maps, and dungeons with multiple paths and diverse mechanics. The only thing TERA has that I wish GW2 had was action combat.
  • edited January 12
    This community needs to come to together for the greater good. I'm sick and tired of constantly being neglected. If the WoW community can come together for legacy severs(and worked), so can we. Someone needs to come up with a petition showing how much we care about this game and want to see major changes(compile a list also). Because this is getting ridiculous with excuses and lack of freedom for Enmasse.

    I refuse to sit here and do absolutely nothing while I watch this once beloved game go downhill
    edited January 12
    The thing is Blizzard is an American company, BHS is Korean...
    The other feedback thread already got forgotten about @Spacecats didn't bother to merge the threads, and the community itself doesn't care.
  • Ok, so... what do we do? All it takes Is a little reading to see how many people feel forgotten by the game here, but surely something has to have worked somewhere? Clearly we are passionate about this game and would like to see it succeed.

    It seems, at least on this forum, a good number of players feel the game went/is going the wrong direction. There are numerous lists about what could be changed which seem to be ignored.

    How about if En Masse told us what they have direct control over and we then gave input specific to said list? Sort of work with what we can rather than complain about what we can do nothing about?

    For instance, Can En Masse control dungeon hp and damage %?

    For what I know they control, I really think getting rid of double vanguards for specific events is a bad move. It takes a constant stream of mats away and turns it into come and get it if you're logged on when we do it. This seems to me a way to lose active players. Why would I log on now when I know an event is coming?

    This may not go deep enough to "fix" things, but maybe it gets the dialogue going in the right direction and then who knows? The idea is not to let BHS off the hook, but to start making some immediate meaningful improvements.

    I will say by dialoguing with En Masse about changes, it should not be us demanding and En Masse giving in to the "I want double and triple this and that". It should be dialogue about the scope of En Masse authority and how it is Strategically and Tactically administered to engage and hopefully grow the player base.

    But, seriously, any ideas? I'll help with whatever I can.
  • counterpointcounterpoint ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited January 13
    Meshak wrote: »
    How about if En Masse told us what they have direct control over and we then gave input specific to said list? Sort of work with what we can rather than complain about what we can do nothing about?

    I can tell you what I know, at least (though this is just my personal opinion based on what I've observed over the years and the tidbits they've said on the forum and to player council).

    (Begin long post...)

    Basically, all the decisions about the game itself, its balance, and patch contents belong to BHS and are their responsibility. EME's responsibility is to, within certain parameters, develop events that encourage people to play the game. They can also develop and control, within certain parameters, certain reward systems and structures, along with the way they price and sell things on the cash shop.

    I emphasize "within certain parameters" because basically BHS is aware of everything they're doing, and has veto power if they really don't like something. So they couldn't, for example, just decide to arbitrarily take everything out of lootboxes and put them on for direct sale unless BHS signed off on it, because it affects both of their revenue streams. Likewise, for example, they were forbidden from releasing a system they developed that would have provided everyone a fair way to earn all the dragon mounts in-game, as BHS exercised their veto power and blocked it (causing a huge mess at the time).

    Technically speaking, by editing server files they could make more fundamental changes to things like drop tables and enemy parameters (and likely skill balance, I'm guessing). However, any time they did something like this, it would get overwritten by BHS when the next patch comes out, and patches (basically) come out monthly now. So unless they want to be constantly redoing their changes and "fighting BHS" every month, it's in their best interest to have these sorts of changes made by BHS and "flow down" to them from the upstream patch. In addition, it's BHS's responsibility to control and manage the flow of progression in the game, and they're the only ones with the full picture of what they have in mind for future patches.

    (It's important to note that most of the major/experimental changes Gameforge did recently were on their test server, which they already know is going to permanently disappear before the next patch. So this allows them to play with all sorts of things that they "technically can" do, but it would be counterproductive to do on the regular servers.)

    The point about "fighting BHS" is also important because EME is a sister company to BHS (same owners/investors). They won't and can't do anything overt like "we don't believe in your vision for the game, BHS, and we're going to do our own thing." They must always play the political game with BHS and "encourage" them to make changes (providing evidence/backup for their case), while doing what they are allowed to do within the box they can play in. In short, if BHS is the head office, EME is the local sales/distribution office. They mostly get decisions handed down from corporate, but can do some things in the local market that they believe will be more effective -- so long as it doesn't conflict with what corporate wants. (Edit: Just want to be clear, this is just an analogy for this particular relationship for this game. EME is still a full company and has its own CEO, etc. They're a sister company, not a subdivision. Just, for TERA, BHS is in charge because it's their game.)

    Further, because BHS and EME are sister companies, their shared owners/investors aren't going to be willing to hire a whole bunch of people just to do the same things BHS is already paying people to do for the game globally. For example, BHS has people responsible for doing class balance, and that's their job. They're not going to let EME pay someone to do custom class balance for our region, and so pay two different people to do the same job. So there's a difference between localization/local market customization and breaking away from the core game itself. The latter I expect EME will never do. (Some of the things people don't like about the direction the game has gone fall into that category, and would be basically impossible for EME to change unless there's a substantial change in vision and leadership at BHS.)

    Of course they deliver feedback to BHS about players' opinions on lots of things, because BHS' TERA revenue is also directly impacted if players in any region are unhappy and stop playing. I also know EME staff have their personal own opinions of what they'd ideally want to do about the game if it were up to them. But again, because of the politics, it's exceedingly rare to see them ever say anything that outright goes against what BHS wants, since that isn't their place. I can probably count on my hands the amount of times they've done that over the years, and even then it's guarded (but that's also what makes it stand out).

    So with all this said... the things I try to focus on when I can discuss with any EME staff:

    1) Issues that specifically relate to our localization of the game and work they've done "in-house", like reward merchants, events, and the cash shop
    2) Outright bugs, exploits, and things so wrong that they will have a strong case to either act directly or argue for urgent action by BHS (whether BHS chooses to act or not)
    3) The general root or root cause of overall dissatisfaction in the hopes that the concern is taken forward and has an impact on future long-term direction.

    I try to keep in mind that everything has to go many layers up the authority chain. Spacecats has to report game feedback to Seandynamite, who may have to report to Denommenator (and in some cases may have to go all the way to Kimmander), and things for BHS have to first go from there to our region's BHS rep, who may then have to go up from there to their boss, and the idea may end up in committee and ultimately to the TERA producer who would assign to the developers responsible. Never mind the fact that there are least 5 other markets that also get their own chance to similarly try to elevate feedback. So when you're so many layers removed from the actual people doing the work, it's like a game of telephone tag. The message better be damn clear or it'll never make it through in one piece. Any one person in the whole chain who doesn't understand the problem or doesn't agree or doesn't believe in the proposed remedy (or has someone else telling them the opposite), and the whole thing dies on the vine.

    Anyway, that's gotten really long and maybe rambling, but hopefully that helps someone get a better picture of (how I see) this structure, and what I think you're against in terms of giving feedback.

    One last thing...
    Meshak wrote: »
    For what I know they control, I really think getting rid of double vanguards for specific events is a bad move. It takes a constant stream of mats away and turns it into come and get it if you're logged on when we do it. This seems to me a way to lose active players. Why would I log on now when I know an event is coming?

    My thought on this is that, if they're going to switch to this model, they need to totally change the way they do events, and not make it an occasional weekend thing how it is now. Instead, it should be like the battleground jackpot calendar where every day there's some event going on. Like, today is Double Item XP day, tomorrow is Double Vanguard day, the next day is Double Leveling XP Day, Bonus Drops, 25% more gold in Vanguard, or whatever. That way there's a large variety of different events and something is happening all the time.

    I agree with you that they can't just take that away and then be like the way it is now where once every few weekends there's an event.
  • so EME and BHS are the same, I see why the game is boring. We are playing what Koreans like, endless grinding.
    NA loves PVP.
Sign In or Register to comment.