Sigh. I quit another TF.

[Sovera]

I find you a bit thin skinned, Snarky. Just an observation instead of an attack, though it is your (repeated) posts about this sort of thing that prompted this opinion. That said some of your peeves are perfectly justified. I too would not touch a +4 TF while leveling.

 

But I find the weaker/dumber/more puzzled the team the more fun it is for me. I just like the extra ordeal of pushing through especially since my characters tend to be able to solo most things so the wipes don't tend to affect me.

 

That said I've tried to duo Market Crash about three times with a friend and we always stall on the last boss what with the friend unable to survive the adds and me having to run from the debuff making the boss regenerate its HP. Plenty easy on a full team but hard on a duo that is not specialized.

[ZemX]

26 minutes ago, SarahTheM1 said:

See also: Whatever tanking style apparently requires you to jump three mobs ahead, leaving half the team trailing behind slowly cleaning up purple con bosses that survived the initial alphas on the last several mobs. Really feels like some folks out there don't actually play "tanks" they play "farmers"...

 

I agree with you that jumping three mobs ahead is not "tanking".  It's soloing.  Moving ahead to the next mob before the current one is completely dead... is another story.   People still argue over this one but it's a judgement call on the part of a tank to do this.  It's advantageous to the whole team if you can do this and do it right.  Obviously, if you skip out early and someone dies... you screwed up.  But if you can leave the team to finish off the last enemy or two, judging they can handle it, getting to that next mob to establish aggro and collect them into a tighter group (if possible) before the rest of the team piles into it?  That's good tanking.

 

Sometimes though, I'll notice I'm not the only one leaving early.  Doesn't happen tremendously often but it does happen.  If I see too much of that and I am tanking, I usually slow down and stick with the rest of the team.  If the other folks running ahead aren't dying well... that's just a different way the team is playing.  I do what I do. 

 

Maybe I can put it more simply this way.  Personal tanking philosophy: "If people are dying ahead of me, that's their fault.  If they are dying behind me... it's mine."

(unless they are blasters)

[SarahTheM1]

23 minutes ago, ZemX said:

 

I agree with you that jumping three mobs ahead is not "tanking".  It's soloing.  Moving ahead to the next mob before the current one is completely dead... is another story.   People still argue over this one but it's a judgement call on the part of a tank to do this.  It's advantageous to the whole team if you can do this and do it right.  Obviously, if you skip out early and someone dies... you screwed up.  But if you can leave the team to finish off the last enemy or two, judging they can handle it, getting to that next mob to establish aggro and collect them into a tighter group (if possible) before the rest of the team piles into it?  That's good tanking.

 

Sometimes though, I'll notice I'm not the only one leaving early.  Doesn't happen tremendously often but it does happen.  If I see too much of that and I am tanking, I usually slow down and stick with the rest of the team.  If the other folks running ahead aren't dying well... that's just a different way the team is playing.  I do what I do. 

 

Maybe I can put it more simply this way.  Personal tanking philosophy: "If people are dying ahead of me, that's their fault.  If they are dying behind me... it's mine."

(unless they are blasters)

Oh yeah, to be clear there's an art to it and it can be absolutely be done right. I would never begrudge a tank for running a few seconds ahead to prep the next mob rather than stick around to make sure every last enemy's HP bar was empty first. Things do also get a bit funky depending on the map/enemy group. Not gonna lie that a non-zero amount of my recent frustration has been people who equate "Paragon Protector just popped Moment of Glory" with "Paragon Protector is no longer my problem, NEXT MOB NAO".

[SarahTheM1]

Also speaking of the whole "I'm soloing but graciously allowing you to tag along" attitude, it reminds me of a team gone wrong from a while back...

 

Dude was advertising for portal missions, which hey, it's something different from endless scanners in PI so I gladly joined. It was the very first mission of To Save a Thousand Worlds, which is to say a giant outdoor map populated by identical mobs of 20 werewolves held up by one glowie. Nobody is rushing things; it's a completely casual late night tank and spank affair. In fact, I was particularly delighted because normally werewolves are a slog to fight but this team was cutting through 'em like butter. Eventually after clearing 40-50% of the map we do stumble across the glowie and the mission completes and that's when everything goes to crap.

 

Classic team etiquette problem: When do you hit Exit Mission? Some people have a Pavlovian response and slam that thing the millisecond they hear the mission complete jingle because you gotta go fast. Some people are members of the clean plate club and would rather finish off that 20% HP boss first because XP is nice. And then there's the kill all/kill most side of things, which isn't super common for regular mission teams in my experience but ok. Ultimately none of them is strictly Wrong, but mismatched expectations and lack of communication cause friction...

 

When the first 2-3 people bounce out of the mission instantly, my instincts are thus: If half~ the team has bounced, I bounce. I'm not going to linger around fighting uphill against x8 mobs for no reason. So after a moment to make sure I'm not stranding anyone in a bad fight, I also go ahead and hop out. And hey, it's To Save a Thousand Worlds...there's another map full of identical mobs to farm *every single mission*.

 

Only after half of the team is stranded outside waiting for the next mish does the team "leader" finally speak up to gracefully handle this minor hiccup... "Don't know why you left the mish, I didn't tell you to. You can either wait for me to finish or leave, your choice."

 

Normally on crappy teams I just silently leave at a convenient time or make up an excuse and run for the hills, but suffice to say I had some parting words over that one. Why even go through the hassle of assembling a team if you care that little about anyone other than yourself?

 

Incidentally I appreciate that nowadays people are at least a little more forthcoming about what flavor of ITF or whatever they happen to be running. All it takes is a simple heads up to make sure everyone's on the same page.

 

Now if only we can get people to see eye to eye on the big Vahz ambush in Posi 1...

[Techwright]

2 hours ago, ZemX said:

 

Moving ahead to the next mob before the current one is completely dead... is another story.   People still argue over this one but it's a judgement call on the part of a tank to do this.  It's advantageous to the whole team if you can do this and do it right. 

 

I don't see it often, but I personally appreciate the tank that can aggro those last couple, get them to follow him, then hit the next crowd.  It's even better if the team realizes what the tank is doing and snuggles close to the tank to aid in that draw, rather than stand there like lunks slugging it out.  It's rare though, as I said.  And should the team be targeting through the tank or brute, it should be easier for the tank to gain that aggro.  Admittedly that's become a rather antiquated mindset though.

 

To be honest though, I also rarely see the tank-led attacks these days.  Most PUGs of my acquaintance are the "everyman for himself" variety, and the tank often gets stuck in the middle somewhere.

 

54 minutes ago, SarahTheM1 said:

Classic team etiquette problem: When do you hit Exit Mission?

I find it is simply good form to stay in until the lead exits.  Once they do, everyone should rush out.  The player who feels they have to clean out the room at that point is well-intentioned, but holding up the team.  That said, there's still a judgement call.  If the lead is being obtuse about a point of obvious departure, chances are a couple will bolt the instance at that point anyway, and others will follow.

[Sir Myshkin]

3 hours ago, SarahTheM1 said:

At the risk of opening myself up to all manner of downvoting, lectures on how to "actually" play the game, and etc. this is exactly the attitude that drives me away from most higher level teams these days.

 

Speaking specifically for myself since you did quote me, and I feel you did not understand my sentiment, I will repost the following from the remainder of that paragraph with added emphasis:

 

Quote

I will not put undue stress onto a team just to fill some illusion of power that some get when 'leading'. I had been touring a team through a mission arc over several days (half dozen units a night roughly) with a pretty varying array of enemy groups folks tend to skip/avoid/never see in Radios. I am always clear that if anyone ever feels they're struggling to speak out, and if they feel they need to run back from combat to stay alive, then do so. This is my barbecue, I'm responsible for the fire.

 

Frankly put I am not going to run any team at a setting I know I can't handle solo when the dynamic of the team under me is uncertain or has not otherwise had an opportunity to prove otherwise, and in line with that if the dynamic of the team is incapable of handling a higher setting, I will drop it back accordingly of my own judgement. Despite what some may protest, I will not watch people pointlessly kick the bucket at the expense of keeping a mission +4.

 

I hold myself accountable to being able to keep the team safe and that starts at a minimum level of expectation that if I myself can't do it alone, I also will not burden that risk on anyone else. I'm not the type of person that walks into a level 50 map with an unslotted character they have no idea how to play and pops a mission up to +4 and drags 7 others unknowingly into something crazy like Carnies or Pantheon and expects them to carry me, that's [expletive].

 

Having said that, to your original intent of your post, yes I agree that there are situations where miscommunication (or just lack of) result in strange dynamics, split teams, and idealiz mindsets of "I'll just do it alone" which don't necessarily help anyone. Are there time were having a dividable team is beneficial? Sure, if it's clear and understood, and the team is able to make that double or triple fracture to complete a mission faster, then I won't necessarily tell a team no. Back in the day that's just what Scrappers did, and it was kind of their thing, but now a days everyone thinks they're a Scrapper and we end up with a bag full of muder-kittens that can't take commands. So, I get what avenue you came from, that's just not my street.

 

 

[SarahTheM1]

Apologies for the misunderstanding. Seems like we're pretty much on the same page then - I'd much, much rather start at +0 or +1 and then if things are too easy ramp up from there instead of starting at +4 and needing to beg and plead with an oblivious team lead to pull it back down. In my line of thinking it just has nothing to do with what anyone in particular can solo, which I guess is where I got thrown off.

 

And on that note, another anecdote, this time from the Live days:

 

We're doing the alternate Mercy mission path, ole Dr. Geist. The team leader has decided that our 8-10 team can handle x8/+4 Arachnos. Suffice to say, no, no we couldn't. Not in a million years. In the inevitable and ensuing cycle of people dying, hospitaling, coming back in, immediately dying again that accompanies many a poorly run team, I gently suggested that maybe, just maybe we could be doing better if things were turned down a smidge.

 

To which I was helpfully informed by the leader "Max Team + Max Difficulty = Max XP. Any level." 🙄 I of course went off in search of inferior sources of XP thereafter...

[cranebump]

12 hours ago, SarahTheM1 said:

The team leader has decided that our 8-10 team can handle x8/+4 Arachnos. To which I was helpfully informed by the leader "Max Team + Max Difficulty = Max XP. Any level."

Well, first the amended version of this person's formula: it should be "Max Team + Max Difficulty = Max XP MINUS DEBT MINUS FRUSTRATION LEVEL MINUS DISREGARD FOR YOUR TEAMMATES MINUS LACK OF UNDERSTSANDING THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LVL 10 AND LVL 50=one craptastic idea. 

 

Can't blame you for bailing on that one.

[Crossie]

I got kicked out of a mission group because I switched to a level 50 toon and mission group was clear no 50's allowed (was a lvl 38 or so mission group).  

 

Cool - I understood that.  

 

Switched to my lvl 42 scrapper and was kicked out again after the first mission because I was too strong.  Rude!

[Yaliw]

19 hours ago, Sovera said:

I find you a bit thin skinned, Snarky. Just an observation instead of an attack, though it is your (repeated) posts about this sort of thing that prompted this opinion. That said some of your peeves are perfectly justified. I too would not touch a +4 TF while leveling.

 

But I find the weaker/dumber/more puzzled the team the more fun it is for me. I just like the extra ordeal of pushing through especially since my characters tend to be able to solo most things so the wipes don't tend to affect me.

 

That said I've tried to duo Market Crash about three times with a friend and we always stall on the last boss what with the friend unable to survive the adds and me having to run from the debuff making the boss regenerate its HP. Plenty easy on a full team but hard on a duo that is not specialized.

Snarky must be an alt account for a dev because the sheer amount of bitching and whining he does would have gotten him banned from any other moderated forum.

[tidge]

19 hours ago, SarahTheM1 said:

Oh yeah, to be clear there's an art to it and it can be absolutely be done right. I would never begrudge a tank for running a few seconds ahead to prep the next mob rather than stick around to make sure every last enemy's HP bar was empty first. Things do also get a bit funky depending on the map/enemy group. Not gonna lie that a non-zero amount of my recent frustration has been people who equate "Paragon Protector just popped Moment of Glory" with "Paragon Protector is no longer my problem, NEXT MOB NAO".

 

I have at least two characters that can squash a MoG-infused Paragon Protector without using any inspirations (*1). Those characters stick around to finish off the enemy. On all my other characters, I'm monitoring last hit chance and doing the math on Streakbreaker... it usually doesn't take long to realize that I can come back for that one.

 

(*1) It doesn't take much more than slotting for Accuracy, rocking a +ToHit bonus, and something like an enhanced Build Up / Aim. Aura-dudes and proc-monsters aren't typically going to cut it.

 

18 hours ago, SarahTheM1 said:

Classic team etiquette problem: When do you hit Exit Mission?

 

17 hours ago, Techwright said:

I find it is simply good form to stay in until the lead exits.  Once they do, everyone should rush out.  The player who feels they have to clean out the room at that point is well-intentioned, but holding up the team.  That said, there's still a judgement call.  If the lead is being obtuse about a point of obvious departure, chances are a couple will bolt the instance at that point anyway, and others will follow.

 

I with @Techwright, with one exception: If the TF lead wants to stay and destroy all the police station doors in the first Penny Yin TF mission, I'm not sticking around for that nonsense. Go and run Aaron Thiery's arc if you are that desperate for Doorbuster. Otherwise, I stick around and defeat... my chances of getting the good recipe drop go up as more players exit!

 

One arc that I wish players would be thorough about "defeat all" is the concluding arc of Positron 2 TF, at least to take out as many of the named Vahzilok leaders as possible. I am aware of the other ways to get those leaders... I'm just not sure how many players are aware of how many are in that mission.

[Snarky]

34 minutes ago, Yaliw said:

Snarky must be an alt account for a dev because the sheer amount of bitching and whining he does would have gotten him banned from any other moderated forum.

I not only am not a Dev I missed out on the "secret server" years.  I look back and think there was a (slim) chance.  I was as active on the servers and on the boards there as I am here.  I knew a few people I suspect were "in the know" if only casually.  (build questions, etc).  See if this sounds like me: When they gave the notice the City was shutting down I came on once, said goodbye to everyone I could find, and logged.  So pissed.  So very very pissed.  No game, no boards, went to WoW.  (still have that active acct as a backup....)  

 

So, no.  Not a Dev.  Not even calm enough to (possibly) get an invite to hang out with the cool kids.  Plus, really, I hate coding.  Tried it once.  On punchcards lol.  I did find that I love math.  I did okay until I got to multi-variable Calculus where i went from top of the class to struggling to keep an A.  F-ing linear algebra.  first time i had seen it.  Deep end math.

 

 

[ChzBoi]

6 minutes ago, Snarky said:

.........I was as active on the servers and on the boards there as I am here......

....wait...are you Lemur Lad?!?!?!   😁
http://www.naturephoto-cz.com/photos/krasensky/ring-tailed-lemur-0031.jpg