forming instances

[Ulmo 1997-2011]

The members of Valar have to be just about the rudest people I have tried to form instance runs with. Everyone has something more important to do and expect the rest to wait for them. This happens on scheduled instance nights and impromptu runs alike. Forming groups isn't hard enough as it is, many expect the group to wait for solo activities that can be done any time. Or they start something that over laps a scheduled run. Or they agree that doing an instance is something they want but join something else in the mean time instead of supporting the formation of the Valar run.

It has gotten to the point where I enjoy PUGs more than Valar groups. The people are more considerate of my time and each other's. They are more concerned with getting things started than their personal agendas.

I would think that Valar members would be excited to do things together when enough are on at once to do so. I would think that they would be willing to just jump into things for the sake of doing stuff together for the fun and challenge of it. In the process they would find support for the things they want come around much faster as well. But instead we just all chat about what we want, discuss missing quests for our 65s that don't even need quests any more or could have been sorted out during solo time, explaining that the solo endeavor we are involved with is taking precedences right now and some of the most lame nonsense that keeps us from doing things together.

If we can't make forming groups a priority some times, if we can't show courtesy for each other and those trying to form the group by making ourselves available and ready and if we can't have our wanted quests and supplies sorted out ahead of time on our own then we obviously have little concern for each other or the fun of doing things together. Forming a group should not be the nightmare it is in Valar.

[Eonwë]

A few comments:

1.) I doubt your target audience (assuming your target audience to be "the rude people") even bother to read the Forum. Only a handful of all members come to meetings. I'm mildly curious how many have visited the web site since they joined.

We have 150 Full Members and Members of Honor in the Valar Guild at my last count(which was this week). Of those, 74 are in the guild branch on LotRO, a sizable amount to be sure. However, even assuming that by "everyone" you mean only the LotRO members, that's still a bit much. Of the several I've seen as I've played, I know enough of them who are not so.

2.) That said, I agree with the premise, the premise being that making the group wait on you is rude, with a few stipulations:

a.) That when we're talking about waiting on people, we're talking about upwards of 5-15 minutes without any reasonable explanation, and not some 30-second "I just got out of a skirmish, let me sell these bounties and repair" kind of thing. Anything a minute or less is leeway.

b.) That of the people we're talking about waiting on, it's been already established that they want to go on the run, either because they have something they want to see, or because they've volunteered to fill a spot if necessary. This rules out those that are asked when go time is really near and they might be otherwise engaged already because they didn't intend to go on the run. In this case, yes, those willing to go should be ready at "Go Time" just in case.

With those stipulations in place, I will say that yes, we are a Guild that has grounded itself for the last 13 years in honor, courtesy, and comaraderie. This doesn't just mean that we don't use profanity and obscenity, that we use "drat" , "darn", and "bah" instead of their more Orcish counterparts.

a.) It also means that we respect eachother and our disparate playstyles. Not everyone plays the same way, traits the same way, or sees the same things as important for their character. Some things are "mandatory" for a class, yes. Everything else is negotiable.

b.) It means we don't waste our time bashing how others spec, trait, whatever. If we have something constructive to suggest, we do so in a polite manner and with no tone of condescension. If we don't agree with the suggestions, we take it politely and respond politely. Those whose suggestions were refused should also politely accept such refusal.

c.) It means if we get together to do something as a group, we do so in as timely a manner as possible (according to a mutually understood and agreed upon time).

This means in the case of official group runs, those going are ready by Go Time (see 3).

In impromptu runs, it means everyone who wants to go has a reasonable expectation of when the run is going to happen. Someone might be busy now, but available in 15 minutes. That's not a problem in my opinion, so long as that is communicated to the rest of the group. The rest of the group, if already ready, then has the option of waiting for that person if possible (or the wait is reasonably short), or if time constraints don't allow that for some reason (or the wait would be unreasonably long) and they are able to give the run a try minus the person, politely communicating that to the person who can't be available for X minutes. These are impromptu runs, after all, and the dungeon can be run again, like during official guild run time (see 3).

d.) These of course should not be taken as a comprehensive definition. The point is that being courteous comprises more than simply speaking courteously.

3.) I already made a suggestion some weeks ago as to how to alleviate several issues in respect to official runs. From those who did comment on it (which almost constitute a full fellowship in themselves), it seemed it got favorable support. As this doesn't seem to have been tried, I assumed an equivalent or better way was determined. If we're still having issues though, I would again point to my suggestion. It's not hard to implement. For simplicity, everything could have a binary weight: 1 or 0. If the person qualifies, it's a 1 for that person in that column (or if you prefer, a "checK"); if not, it's a 0 (or "no check"). Add them all together, only hold on to totals for the most recent four-eight weeks for simplicity. That's between 8 and 16 values for each person (Mon and Wed), but would only need to be worried about when that person has run something within those four weeks. It would naturally favor regular running with contributions to making the list on the forum, showing up and being ready at Go Time.

The key is that all officers/group leaders would have to (be willing to) keep up on it and work together with it. Everything can't just be dumped on one person, because not only do many of us have real life obligations we must attend to (which I no doubt am preaching to the choir in that comment), some of us also have other Valar Guild duties to attend to which vie for our free time with the gaming we'd also like to do.

And put simply: GO TIME means GO TIME. As in, it has to. If there are some people who are ready at Go Time and some who aren't, take those who are ready and go do something. You have the option in LotRO!

In WoW, if I don't have at least 3, I can't get guild credit for dungeons. If I don't have 5, I can't have a full dungeon guild group. If I don't have 8, I can't get guild credit for raids.

In LotRO, you have duo content. You have 3-man content. If you have four people, you can tone down a fellowship skirmish's level and still get something for the effort (and all beneficial to some degree or other at the max level) whether you clear it or not. If you have 5, you could do the same with 4, or you could try a fellowship dungeon or skirmish for the challenge. If there's not an option from the list on the Forum (which would need to be made weekly, preferrably during the previous week for the next) then pick one at random.

Establish who wants to go before go time. Establish the choice of instance based on the list on the Forum (bonus: encourages Forum participation) and the total checkboxes of the previous weeks for the people involved. When Go Time hits, all who are ready get a check in that box for the night. All who aren't don't. Take whoever's ready to do something, and do something. If other people are ready later in the night, the choice of the instance when there are enough will naturally come from the people who are ready at Go Time (which would've been selected before/at Go Time).

It then ceases to be about politeness/rudeness, and becomes about who's ready and who's not, who's helping to get to the run faster, and potentially get more runs in. I think it's a fair enough system, and haven't heard anyone disagree.

So the question becomes, are all the officers/group leaders willing to make it happen?

[nimrodel]

very good suggestions Eonwe, hope things become more organized.
I, for one, am usually happy to try anything on instance nights. however the whole group forming process is such a painful ordeal and it doesn't have to be. Most of us have RL obligations and i don't mind waiting around for 15 minutes or so for someone to show up, especially if they have indicated at some relatively recent point that they would be there. However the waiting forever for a 5th or 6th to show up, with no real idea whether or not anybody else is coming is ridiculous. While an all kin run is ideal and hopefully can be accomplished most of the time, i think that if it is 8:15 or so and 5 people are ready to go, why not fill in with a friend or even PUGger if need be and get the show on the road? waiting until 9 for that last kinmate and then going is very annoying and not necessary in LOTRO from the point of view of needing it for guild run credit. all the waiting because another Valarite MIGHT show up is partially what causes people to get involved in things before the kin run. i can't count how many times i have stood around doing absolutely nothing waiting for things to get started. i now sometimes do things while waitng, but try to keep it to things i can instantly or within a minute or 2 leave, like rep stuff or deeding. But i can certainly understand why people might come on at say 6:30, see a call for something they want to do, and think "well, i should be done by then and even if i"m not, we'll probably be waiting around for a 6th to show up anyway." because then what should they do? Not go with a group for something they want, and then waste 45 minutes waiting on Valarites to show and then maybe not even go anyway? Like i said, i can see why people might get involved beforehand, because at least then they get something done.

Probably the last straw for me in this regard happened a few weeks ago. I didn't get there until right at 8:00 and missed any discussion of what we were going to do(maybe thinking about HoC?), but was pretty much ready to go. i made the 5th person, so we were one short. i thought, at first anyway, oh good, maybe we can get going quickly, but no.
By 8:15 gildor had decided he couldn't do the run that night after all, which i told everyone. galdor had said earlier in the day he probably couldn't come back because he had to take care of his daughter. melkor is out of town, eomer had been MIA for awhile at that point due to comp issues, europeans have said several times the 8:00 instance is too late for them. everyone else who normally comes was on. so i asked if we had any friends on who might want to join us. I was then informed we were trying to do an all valar run. so we waited until almost 9:00 and 5 manned GS. which was fun sure, however i'm sure there were other fun things to do that could have been more useful to most of us in the group. By 8:20 it was pretty apparent that no more Valarites were likely coming, so why not grab a PUGGer and get going. needless time wasting like this is what makes people start doing other stuff while waiting around, which just then compounds the problem.
one last thing, some of us have 65s that still like to do the quests when possible even if we don't strictly need them. and while i agree that we should take care of that ahead of time, that is hard to do when there is no decision on what we are doing until the last minute. hopefully more people can be encouraged to use the forums to help with some of these issues

[Varda]

Aye, Nimrodel. Waiting for a 6th is killing us and I don't think I'll do that anymore. We'll go with a short group or pug someone. If someone comes in late, even for a very good reason, he or she may find that the spot is filled.

[Eonwë]

In response to Ulmo's kinship letter, which I'm including to offer proper context to my reply. I add it here because it's all part of the same conversation.

Ulmo's Kinship Letter:

Why do we do instances? We go into them because 1 person would like to beat it for the 1st time and even though he has no plan for how to do it? We go in with whatever toon people want to bring with no plan for how this will work? Most have no idea how to do the fight or their part in it? Few ever visit the forum to discuss what we want to do or how to do it? We stand around and wait for people to do what they should have done before the scheduled start?

I'm sorry, but I don't understand how anyone can think this is fun. It certainly isn't fun for me. When people are ready to do what it takes to have a chance at winning I will be around. Until then I will be very selective choosing what I take part in. Fiascos doomed to failure like last night will not include me any more.

Sincerely,
Ulmo

I feel no need to comment in length on the topics of forum use and being ready on time, as I’ve already done so both in relation to this discussion and in various situations throughout the years. They are not causes I’m unfamiliar with, and at a separate moment I’d be willing to re-engage them.

What I am interested in discussing right now are your very pertinent questions, starting with the first: “Why do we bother? Why do we run instances?” I can’t speak for everyone, but here’s my answer. Though certain aspects span my instance running in its entirety, not solely my running with Valar, I assure you it will be applicable to the topic at hand, as you will see.

"Why do we bother? Why do we run instances?"
I don’t. Not as much as I might. I do the Valar runs in WoW, mind you, which have been pretty regular of late (thanks to all of you who come!), but other than that, no. There are valid reasons, time constraints being one of them (40-minute queues for heroics in WoW being another). A big reason, however, is that every so often from certain sectors of the general communities of both LotRO and WoW, I get a strong whiff of an elitist attitude that says everyone should already know everything about everything that exists in every dungeon before they ever set foot in it, preferably before they even hit the appropriate level. It says if you screw up because you dared not know something, if you dared not max out all your traits or trait a specific way, if you dared spend a talent point (even an “optional” one) because it helped your play style instead of using the cookie-cutter build everyone else does, you’re trash and should be discarded. It’s an attitude that even in small doses sours my desire to do group content. It’s an attitude I don’t want to see in Valar. We’re supposed to be a haven.

By your letter, you are apparently someone who likes to research every fight beforehand and have everything spelled out for you. If that’s fun for you, great. I’m glad you have your way of enjoying the game. For me, I like to go in blind. I like to learn fights first-hand rather than have them told to me. I like to see what the boss uses, and find out quickly why I should avoid it. That’s what I find fun.

Have I looked up boss fights? Yes. At times where we’ve had trouble and as group leader it was my duty to ensure a relatively smooth run, I’ve looked up the boss and seen what to watch out for.

Have I asked for the gist of a fight? Yes. I understand that not everyone may find it as fun as I do when I suddenly get 1-shot for not hiding behind the boulder the boss just got done throwing down.

Have I explained the fight beforehand? Yes. Probably more than I need to. When someone else knows it, as group leader I welcome their input to ensure the smoothest run. If something we’re doing isn’t working, it’s time to change tactics. However, if the group decided they wanted to go in blind and see what happens (because some people enjoy the challenge of actually learning an encounter rather than having someone else learn it for them), I would do my very best to avoid saying anything about a fight other than “This is gonna be fun :}”. As group leader, I may sacrifice a little bit of my fun by looking up encounter mechanics to ensure a smooth run, but I do my best not to deny the “fun” option to those with me. If we die, I can always go back and mention the part that killed us, now that they saw it :}

“We go into them because 1 person would like to beat it for the 1st time and even though he has no plan for how to do it?”
“Most have no idea how to do the fight or their part in it?”
First: Do you suggest we not allow people to request or enter an instance unless they’ve been there before? That rules out Valar ever running any brand new dungeons.

Second: Why should I have a plan for how to defeat something I’ve never seen before? If I have an idea of the basic rules of the game (don’t pull aggro off the tank, don’t stand in dangerous-looking areas, and if I die try to figure out why so it doesn’t happen again), that should be sufficient for any first attempt. Any further finesse (sap/mez this mob; this icon means kill this mob first) can be picked up inside the dungeon assuming the others are actually willing to help. Nobody’s perfect and stuff happens, but if people can’t learn from their mistakes, no amount of planning, no strategy guide no matter how detailed, is going to help.

As for knowing “my” part, the straightforward answer is that a person’s “part” is what their class/spec is capable of. If crowd control is involved, my guess would be those with it will use it. If something needs kited, someone who can kite will kite. If there’s a button way over at the other side of the room that can only be hit by Bronze Throwing Axes, send me some bronze and I’ll make them for you :} Everyone should be making the effort to be aware of their surroundings and not developing tunnel vision focused *solely* on the boss to the exclusion of all else (such as those aforementioned “dangerous areas”).

I just can’t imagine that the people in Valar are incapable of adapting to scripted events on the fly. If everyone is using voice chat (of which you are a proponent), there’s even less reason why a group couldn’t adapt on the fly. I can’t imagine that any boss’s script is so immense or complex that it can’t possibly be learned by actually trying to fight the boss. After all, somebody had to have done it to produce those strategy guides and how-to videos. It would be pointless to create a boss so difficult that you couldn’t learn how to beat it by actually fighting it.

None of the bleeding-edge guilds had walkthroughs to tell them how to fight bosses. They died. Alot. They died until they figured out the spots they screwed up on, found a way past it, and got to the next spot where they died. Rinse and repeat until the boss dies instead. Other people come along, and some of them find better or different ways to do stuff. If everyone just copies the first guy through, however, that doesn’t happen, and the community is poorer for it.

“We go in with whatever toon people want to bring with no plan for how this will work?”
If all group roles are filled (Tank/Healer/DPS/possibly CC), and the characters can be reasonably expected to contribute to the run (i.e., it’s not a level 30 in a level 50 instance), I don’t see why it matters who brings what. Blizzard finally got it right when they espoused “Bring the Player, not the Class.” Translation: Any class that can perform a role has a right to potentially perform that role well (Potentiality dependent on player ability, of course) If a class performs significantly better in a role such that other classes intended to fill the same role are not used (or the disparity in use is significant), that is a balance issue and should be fixed immediately. If a class performs significantly worse in an intended role such that no one ever wants to use that class in said role, that again is a balance issue and should be fixed immediately.

Furthermore, the point of “non-optimal” groups is to try stuff out: to see how it works, if it works, and to make the fight more interesting. (Interesting = challenge = fun for some people).

So, why do I run dungeons?
When I run dungeons, it’s because I want to tackle a challenge or see content alongside the people with whom I’m running. I trust them to know what their characters are capable of in their chosen role, and in return I try to know what my character is capable of in the role I’ve chosen. If I see a Death Knight wearing intellect I say something, albeit politely :}

When I run dungeons, it’s with Valar Guild members whenever I can help it. Do I want to win? Do I want to beat whatever boss I’m fighting? Yes and yes (and I do a significant percentage of the time), but if I have to lose, I’d rather lose alongside people whose company I enjoy, than win amidst a bunch of obnoxious jerks. It’s easier to help good people improve their skills than to help jerks not be jerks. Even if said good person is as good a player as they’re ever going to be, I’d rather “carry” someone who’s pleasant to be around than bring along a “good player” whose personality is like nails on a chalkboard.

Some of the most fun fights I’ve been in are when the fight has gone horribly wrong and we’ve pulled victory out of the jaws of defeat (sometimes as Defeat’s jaws are clamped rather soundly around Victory). This can happen even when people know what to expect, and it’s the ability to recover from it rather than have everything fall into pieces that adds that little bit of excitement to an otherwise obvious fight.

Conclusion
I’d hoped I’d find something in this letter I could agree with besides the Forum and the “be ready at Go Time” issues, but I see nothing else agreeable in your letter. If you want to discuss ideas for ensuring we start on time, that’s great, but as I’ve said before, the surest way to start on time is to actually start on time. If you want to discuss what our Rules and CoC are and mean, or if you think they need to be made clearer, that’s great, we can talk about that. As far as I can tell, though, you’re mostly attacking people for not enjoying the game the same way you do.

Since you seem to think my previous suggestion of a method to encourage being prepared/participate is inadequate (as you have chosen not to comment on it in the several weeks it's been on the forum), I would have to ask you what you suggest in its place.

Do you suggest we boot every member who prefers to learn a fight first-hand rather than read about it? Or should we boot every member who does not run in guild groups? Such suggestions will get no support from me.

I said earlier that Valar is a haven. Allow me to expound upon that, since I believe here you and I will find some common ground. We are a place that eschews profanity, obscenity, rudeness, and just plain petty meanness. We demand a standard of civility and courtesy that all members have proven they can manage at some point in order to become members. We seek to foster a sense of community between all our members, across the world and if at all possible across games. It is the task of all members, but more so of all officers, Maia or Vala, Council or retired therefrom, to exemplify these ideals in all their dealings as representatives of Valar. Nobody’s perfect, of course, but that doesn’t negate the purpose or the goal. If there are issues with specific members that cannot be resolved directly, there are measures in place to remedy it. If the issue is on a larger scale, there are also measures to enact a remedy.

All members have the privilege of making suggestions where they think improvement can be made. All ideas will be considered (if they have not already been considered), but not all ideas will be enacted. Pointing out a problem is easy. Finding and implementing a solution that matches our ideals takes work, which is part of the reason we have officers. Those with Maia and Vala honor have at some point proven a committed interest in our success, and hopefully continue to do so.

All the implementation in the world, however, won’t help unless members are on board. I can sit in WoW all I want, declaring “Go Time means Go Time,” posting everywhere what to do to help out and when. I can offer mithril flakes to my heart’s content for articles sent to the Tolkien Encyclopedia. It doesn’t mean a thing, however, if the members don’t get involved, don’t show up, etc. All members have the privilege of contributing to the Guild according to their abilities. Member contribution is mostly limited by the inclination of the Member, not of the options available. I say all this as someone who has many a time kicked off a guild project only to hear the sound of my own boot swishing through the air.

What you do with your time is your business, Ulmo. You’re free to run or not run as you see fit and as group availability presents itself, just as every other member is. I’d never force anyone to game with me if they didn’t want to. No point in it, as neither of us would really be having fun.

Sincerely as always,
Eonwë

[Maedhros(V)]

Wow, where to start? Even ignoring the most inflammatory comments, the underlying premises are completely contrary to my experiences both within the VG and outside of it that I'm left shaking my head.

The VG rude? That's crazy talk. Almost everyone I've met in the VG has been polite, patient, and fun to group with. While I agree that getting instances started can be difficult, the majority of the time it's because everybody "wants to do an instance" but we're all standing around deferring to each other ("I dunno, what do YOU want to do?") instead of just picking something and going. The run last Wednesday, which Ulmo seemed to consider such a disaster, I considered to be a success because we had a specific plan ("We're going to X, Y, and Z, you in?") and tried a lot of ambitious things.

Sure, it would have been nice to beat the Forges, but at the end of the day whether we actually beat it or not is the LEAST important aspect of the run as far as I'm concerned. I want to see lots of content and have fun with my friends. Scoring loot is a bonus, but not the point.

Now, I have been specifically called out in chat for "making people wait" on a Grand Stairs run, as I was travelling to the quest-bestower (Oh noes, a two-minute goat ride!) -- but that quest was for the Grand Stairs. If this is the kind of waiting that is a problem, all I can suggest is switching to decaf. >.<

I'm also the guy who wanted to go into Forges. So if the problem is actually me, then come to me about it instead of creating drama in the whole kin. But don't be surprised if all I do is shrug and say, "Sorry it bugs you, dude." I am who I am and I intend to stay that way. I'm in the Valar Guild for Tolkien, not for instances.

-The Gneech

[Ulmo 1997-2011]

I think it is interesting how many things people have assumed I meant when I made no mention of them.

No, I do not like to read spoilers and go into an instance completely prepared by someone else's trial and error. As a matter of fact I have refused to join beta so as not to spoil the fun of new content ahead of time. I do however like to discuss strategy with people with whom I am running instances. I do like discussing with my friends what they have learned in other runs of the same instance. Running in blind like a zerg and wiping is not my idea of fun. And the way LOTRO instances are designed, that is a totally useless way to tackle the puzzles of each instance. Some LOTRO instances require member of groups to play in the traditional role of their character. Other require some strange and specific behavior to meet the objectives. These things need to be discussed and undersood. And often it takes more than just jumping into an instance and trying to play. We do not do this.

Some people think that what upsets me is losing. This is also not true at all nor have I ever expressed that this is what bothers me about our runs. What bothers me is the serious lack of preparation or learning by the members about what we do. Losing because we don't discuss strategy and plan is what bothers me. These instances are puzzles that need to be solved, and we don't solve things.

There are certain loots that drop from each instance. Some have more than others. Some have a lot that many Valar would like to acquire. Part of this game is learning to beat such instances and then going back again for those who did not win items the first time. We have no discussion or plan about how we will do this. We have just beaten HoC HM for the first time, and should be going back for those who still have loots from there they would like. But instead we go into Forges totally unprepared and with no real reson for going. At least no reason we discussed.

Whether it be raiding, or just group instance running a kin needs to organize. People need to make some form of commitment to facilitate runs. This can not be done by committee on the night of instances. Not when we have such limited times that we do things together. It requires people have Ventrillo voice chat. It requires people gather pots, food, scrolls, tokens and such ahead of time and have them all ready. It often requires some discussion of traiting for the instance before we even go in. It often requires discussions on what toon make ups work for an instance, or at least how to compensate with the choices we might have. We don't do much of any of this. And waiting for the night of the run is too late. By the time we sort things out people need to leave. We don't have the luxury of unlimited time on line together.

Some people are happy to run below level content as the major diet of their play. Well, that is fine for some. But I like to have at least part of my play being on level content which is often quite difficult. And many Valar just are not ready for this. Not because they can't play well, but because they just don't know the details of the things they need to do. And the way we do instances this will likely never happen. If all Valar is going to do is run things that are easy and require no preparation then please tell me now and I won't bother trying to get us to do difficult things. As of right now we are still struggling with content that is 2 years old and 5 levels below most of our participating toons. People have asked me to lead runs on SG and such. Well, the way we play together I will not waste my time trying.

When you play a game where 6 people have to get together, be prepared, be available for an amount of time to work together, have materials ready, have discussed strategy ahead of time so as not to use up the limited play time doing so, and they do not do these things then that is rude. This is the type of rude I am talking about. Words mean nothing when one's action speak differently of them. Valar members often do not do the things necessary to be ready and participate in an instance that takes time. I'm sorry if this offends some people, but I do call this rude. It would be different if we were discussing things in forum and working together to improve, but this is not happening. When I discuss how we never get started on time and that people often take extended AFKs and get told this will never change then I say this is rude as well.

[Eonwë]

ulmo said:

I think it is interesting how many things people have assumed I meant when I made no mention of them.

Seeing as I based my reply on your words, perhaps a different choice of words would've better conveyed your meaning? Granted, kinship mail is a rather limited venue in that respect, which is why I replied here.

You say you do not read or like spoilers. Your position then was not well represented by your letter.

Perhaps you could give an example of what kind of strategizing you're talking about that can be done before you're 100% sure of who is coming with you (i.e., before people start logging in on instance night)?

An actual plan of attack on a boss would best be discussed with the boss room in front of you if at all possible, so that people can see what the "battlefield" looks like as it's being explained. Especially if some "strange behavior" is required, it becomes easier to understand with some frame of reference, and people are more likely to remember their part in the plan rather than having to go through hordes of enemies after having listened to all the plans at the beginning, or read them on the forum possibly hours before.

That's not to say discussion about instances can't be had, and yes, the Forum is a great place to "swap war stories," discuss experiences, etc. And if, for example, you died last time to a boss, then yes, maybe spending the time before the next go at that boss trying to figure out/discuss what can be done differently is useful.

I wouldn't suggest "zerging the instance." I did however mention things about "knowing the basic rules." Going in without first knowing what's in the instance is separate from giving no consideration to what mobs you're fighting when you can actually make that determination. If you can get an idea of what the mobs are by examining them, great. If not, seeing how they react to your attack is about the only way to pick out the ones you need to worry about. Sometimes you take a hit so you can figure out where your enemy is weak.

Do some of these puzzles need to be discovered as well, or are they all spelled out by quest text or some similar, and all you have to do is apply brain power? If the former, I can only assume we won't know about them until we stumble upon them.

If you mean "puzzle" more metaphorically, I can only get so much by staring at the puzzle's box. It's alot easier to see how the pieces fit when you've seen their shape.

We had a discussion about how we could choose instances when I made a suggestion last time you brought these runs up. The people who responded liked it. No other suggestions were made.

Running the same instance over and over gets boring for some people. Letting members contribute to the instance list then setting up a fair way to choose from among it at least keeps things relatively fresh. Of course, everyone has the option of choosing the exact same instance. There's also the result in my suggestion that if everyone says "I'm up for anything" that means the group leader gets to choose the instance and no one has anyone but themselves to blame if it's the same instance as last week.

And all officers interested in/involved in said runs should be willing to help out in maintaining whatever system it takes to make this happen beyond their actual involvement in the run itself. Varda is the Kinleader in LotRO, sure, but that doesn't mean she should be the only one helping keep track. If members have volunteered or want to volunteer to help Varda with that, great (I understand she has what she calls "war leaders"), but as far as "required," I pin that on the officers involved, and hopefully we have some.

ulmo said:

It requires people have Ventrillo voice chat.

I'm sorry, but while voice chat might make the game easier, there is no way this game is difficult enough for it to be absolutely required. If you want it on your runs, that's your call, but I have no intention of requiring it for those I game with. No game that leaves a player's offensive and defensive capabilites to the RNG (random number generator for those unfamiliar with the term) and to stats rather than putting the greatest portion into player ability can be difficult enough to require voice chat.

Here's a fun example: Ninja Gaiden (the recent games, not the NES ones). Yes, you can upgrade your weapons, choose from different weapons based on the enemy you're fighting (every weapon has certain drawbacks), you can get some health potions, and can find a limited number of items to extend your HP bar. Even so, it's a tough game even in normal difficulty, and higher difficulties can be murder. But in theory, if someone actually that good wanted to, they could take lvl 1 of any weapon they wanted to and complete the game, without any of those hp buffs, on max difficulty. That person would have to be insanely good and it would probably take a while, but again, it would be about player ability, because this game requires the player himself to find and/or make openings for attacks as well as block, dodge and evade enemy attacks, with multiple enemies all focused on him who can at any time break his block and leave him vulnerable.

Now, when MMO's get to that point, and mix in the group strategy elements of say, Halo or Gears of War, voice chat might be a requirement.

ulmo said:

It often requires some discussion of traiting for the instance before we even go in. It often requires discussions on what toon make ups work for an instance, or at least how to compensate with the choices we might have.

I'm reminded of cases in WoW where people would spec one way for one boss in an instance, then go spec differently for another boss in the same instance. I hope Turbine isn't supporting or condoning behavior in this extreme?

And again, if you have to choose players based on class instead of the role they can perform, you're being cheated.

If we're dealing with odd situations i.e. more (or less) than the usual tanks or healers, not enough CC, not enough DPS, sure, perhaps some discussion should be had. Some discussion might be useful, but again, you won't know who you have until people show up.

[Ulmo 1997-2011]

You say you do not read or like spoilers. Your position then was not well represented by your letter.

My position was not represented one way or the other, not even at all. This is why I don't like that you implied anything at all about it.

I'm sorry, but while voice chat might make the game easier, there is no way this game is difficult enough for it to be absolutely required. If you want it on your runs, that's your call, but I have no intention of requiring it for those I game with. No game that leaves a player's offensive and defensive capabilites to the RNG (random number generator for those unfamiliar with the term) and to stats rather than putting the greatest portion into player ability can be difficult enough to require voice chat.

Wow Eonwe, you sure make definitive statements concerning something you have never experienced. From Moria on the 6 man instances have required reactive play that can only be achieved by those with voice or 6 people who have run the instance so many times it is purely memory. We as a kin have only beaten 2 of the 6 level 60 or lower 2 year old Moria instances with 6 level 65 toons. What would you say is the reason for this then?

This whole debate is silly. 95% of the reply comments to my posts are made by someone who has not experienced the content and does not participate in the Valar runs. I don't see how it serves any purpose to continue. You obviously do not understand how difficult these instances are Eonwe, or what it takes to succeed at them. I have beaten them all, every single 6 and 12 man instance in this game on 2 different characters and most of them on 2 others. I was one of the first to beat the Moria instances back when they first came out and we were all level 60, not 65 with added skills, mitigations and such like now. I was one of those who beat them before spoilers even existed. I was one of those whose strategies became the spoilers. But I guess I don't know what I am talking about.

It is obvious Valar doesn't need my imput to play this game. I know I don't need the frustration of playing with people who won't put in the effort to prepare, plan, discuss and learn what it takes to win. I don't even understand it. I find the challenge exciting. I do not expect to win at any instance in any time frame, but I do expect to see my kinmates taking the steps necessary to improve towards this goal. And I do not see this effort by more than a few. I do see plenty of resistance to my ideas and suggestions. I see plenty of arguments against my suggestions. I won't impose on members any more. Feel free to play and group how ever you want. But you will have to excuse me if I don't participate. it just isn't any fun for me the way it is done.

[Irmo]

Kudos to Eonwe for his wise, elaborate and balanced efforts to treat Ulmo's problems with the attention they deserve.

I understand Ulmo's frustrations. Been there myself. Ulmo, it all boils down to this: you are confronted with some people not making the same in-game choices you do. Those people choose not to have your dedication, nor your commitment. Since they don't you are deprived of playing the game in the way you want.

That is frustrating, but there is no rudeness nor malevolence here. They just don't share your preferences.

Speaking for myself and most of the ones I run with: we have chosen for many years to walk the road of high-end achievement. In the end we have grown tired of it. We now lay back and prefer having fun, goof around and laugh together over trying to achieve the more challenging goals.
But that doesn't mean I don't understand your pain. You put effort and commitment into it, why can't others have the decency to show some respect and at least come prepared and on time? Been there, the T-shirt is in my closet. You are right to expect it, you are not right in calling them rude when they don't.
They probably never thought they were doing something you consider wrong. Have they been taught otherwise? Not told, but actually taught?

When I joined Valar in 1999, you all - especially you Ulmo - showed me the way to play by giving enlightening examples, examples that spoke to my heart and I wanted to follow. My gaming level was deeply below mediocre but I was always treated with friendliness and kindness.
That is still the only way to teach: by good example and inducement. That is what the Valar Guild has been about. Not all those who wander are lost, but accusations do not give a map to find the way home. Only the accuser risks getting lost himself...

You have been my teacher twelve years ago, I would hate to see your frustrations get the better of you. So cheer up and rethink your approach to deal with this.

[Eonwë]

Mar 15, 2011 9:34:22 GMT -5 Ulmo 1997-2011 said:

My position was not represented one way or the other, not even at all. This is why I don't like that you implied anything at all about it.

When you complain that "we go into them because 1 person would like to beat it for the 1st time and even though he has no plan for how to do it?" I don't know what else you could mean. That's why I asked for an example of some "planning" you're talking about, especially any that can be done when you don't know what's in the instance yet and aren't sure who's coming.

Mar 15, 2011 9:34:22 GMT -5 Ulmo 1997-2011 said:

Wow Eonwe, you sure make definitive statements concerning something you have never experienced. From Moria on the 6 man instances have required reactive play that can only be achieved by those with voice or 6 people who have run the instance so many times it is purely memory.

Well there was that one instance,...
Just because I don't run instances every week in LotRO doesn't mean I haven't experienced MMOs. LotRO isn't exactly breaking the mold.
I've done a bit of raiding in WoW, when the content of said raid was the top tier. I've done raids long after they've become old. I've seen no mechanic on any raid boss that would require voice chat. People claim it's required there all the time.
I'm also making statements about what I know of the nature of such games. Are you telling me that the AI in LotRO is such that anything could happen at any moment?

Mar 15, 2011 9:34:22 GMT -5 Ulmo 1997-2011 said:

We as a kin have only beaten 2 of the 6 level 60 or lower 2 year old Moria instances with 6 level 65 toons. What would you say is the reason for this then?

I don't know, but seeing as I'm pretty sure that all of these instances have been run with you, and as you require voice chat, that can't be too big a factor. I suppose lack of knowledge of the instance can't be a reason either, since you know what you're doing. Are we trying to hard mode all of these the first time anyone has seen them? Maybe if people had a chance to actually get a feel for the instance in normal mode first, we could do it on hard mode after?

Mar 15, 2011 9:34:22 GMT -5 Ulmo 1997-2011 said:

This whole debate is silly. 95% of the reply comments to my posts are made by someone who has not experienced the content and does not participate in the Valar runs.

Well, I figured since you adamantly advocate voice chat and I don't, I wouldn't be that welcome in your runs anyway. As your runs have been the primary runs...


The kicker in this whole thing is, on what I consider the important issues, I agree with you. Runs should be organized. People should be ready to go at Go Time, with everything that entails. I was agreeing with these before you said anything.

You seem to forget (and I say seem to since you are dismissing me as a whole based on my LotRO participation) that as far as the organization of runs goes, I've been there, done that, as Irmo says for the high-end content half of this conversation. I've tried organizing runs starting way back when we had a WC3 branch. I experienced these issues in the WoW branch (which you also declared "run aground"). Again, I'm no stranger to this, so I very acutely understand these concepts. So while you may dismiss my "instance cred," don't dismiss my thoughts in this area.

The problem is, your attitude both times you've brought up guild runs on the forum has been "I don't like how we're doing this. I'm not running any more." I ignored that last time and made a suggestion to try and help. Had your attitude been "Guys, what can we do to straighten this out," we'd be focusing on that right now.

Suggestions? I see general statements as to what people should do, and no ideas on how to encourage them to do so. It's possible I'm missing them amidst all the other stuff. Would you point them out?

[Rory 2010-2011]

There's quite a bit of frustration expressed here. I saw the in-game mails sent around, which really should have taken place here instead. For starters, and from someone who's been out of this loop looking in, I certainly don't see "rude" people in Valar Guild.

In fact, I've found friendly people who enjoy each others company enough to have fun playing LOTRO together. Although I'm a VG wall flower who spends more time with my other gaming community, I am still here because of the people. I probably only know Indis and Varda the best, but just recently Galdor invited me into a fellowship to voice chat a bit along with Nimrodel. In my limited experience here, adjectives such as "warm" and "welcoming" are much more accurate than "rude" when it comes to VG.

As for expectations when coordinating events, I want to echo Irmo's thoughts on this matter:

Mar 15, 2011 15:23:45 GMT -5 Irmo said:

I understand Ulmo's frustrations. Been there myself. Ulmo, it all boils down to this: you are confronted with some people not making the same in-game choices you do. Those people choose not to have your dedication, nor your commitment. Since they don't you are deprived of playing the game in the way you want.

That is frustrating, but there is no rudeness nor malevolence here. They just don't share your preferences.

(...)

That is still the only way to teach: by good example and inducement. That is what the Valar Guild has been about.

I certainly understand where Ulmo is coming from, as I've been there many times in the past. For example, I remember a night when my old kinship was never able to complete a full-fellowship instance. We started with 6, had party wipes twice, failing twice, then started a third time only to have one person go link dead and never to return. We weren't doing anything wrong: it was just a difficult instance with people who were decent players but not great players. So they needed practice. We waited half an hour for the link-dead member, then looked for a replacement. From our own kinship, from our friend's list, or from glff, we weren't able to find a 6th, even when trying to pug it. Yes, it was frustrating.

After all of that, what did we do? We took a break. We had fun questing elsewhere, then came back to tackle this instance days later. On this attempt we completed it our first time through, with the original 6 people. Whether it was the time away to mull things over and retrace our steps, or whether it was just sheer determination, coming back to the same instance on another day made this attempt a success.

As a result we made some changes and implemented a 15-minute rule. If those scheduled for an event didn't show up or lost connection for more than 15 minutes, the group was free to find replacements. We also agreed that after the second party wipe or instance fail, any additional attempts were optional for that day. We treated it as a learning experience. We didn't blame anyone, because those struggling or lacking at times knew who they were, and wanted to keep trying to improve. And we didn't ever lash out at each other because we valued our friendships more than we valued any in-game accomplishment.

To be fair to Ulmo, this is one very important step:

Mar 14, 2011 19:33:07 GMT -5 Ulmo 1997-2011 said:

It requires people have Ventrillo voice chat.

I'm not sure if you have everyone in these runs on Ventrilo, but even if they don't have a mic, then need to be there to hear from those coordinating the events.

Back to the general topic...

It's all too easy to blow off steam when we're frustrated. But just remember that we're all here to enjoy the game together. We might not have the same investment and dedication to our time in LOTRO, but we should all want to enjoy the game and each others company. If that isn't true, then we should refocus on what it means to be part of a guild, part of a community.

I've been on both ends of the "skill" scale in groups. I've been the one falling behind and pulling the group down when struggling to play an alt in which I'm unfamiliar. In those times I was thankful for a kinship who showed patience and grace. And I've also been the one getting frustrated when seeing my fellowship members fall behind and struggle. For those times I am thankful that I value their friendship above their in-game abilities.

[Varda]

Well said, Rory.

On the Vent thing, we all do have it for our scheduled runs unless we pug someone, and Irmo has offered a spot even for them.

If anyone needs the Vent info, just let me know!

The fifteen minute rule sounds quite reasonable. We haven't made it a formal rule, but it sounds like an excellent guideline.

[Rory 2010-2011]

Mar 22, 2011 0:48:29 GMT -5 Varda said:

Well said, Rory.

On the Vent thing, we all do have it for our scheduled runs unless we pug someone, and Irmo has offered a spot even for them.

If anyone needs the Vent info, just let me know!

The fifteen minute rule sounds quite reasonable. We haven't made it a formal rule, but it sounds like an excellent guideline.

Thanks. As for the 15-minute rule, we left the decision up to the group. If everyone wanted to keep waiting a little longer, they would. If at least one person wanted to start looking for a replacement, then we would. If the missing person came back after that 15 minute window when we had a replacement, then they were unfortunately out of luck and would have to wait for the next time we did that run.