Profession Aptitude, Proposal For A Character-Based Title To Support PuGs

Hi there,

First, my apologies if this has already been suggested. I did look at the index, and I did search. Nothing I saw really covers what I'm thinking about here.

I propose a new title track and quest/mission set to let people earn a title indicating their versatility/proficiency with a specific character. The set of quests/missions could be independent of campaign.

This is just a proposal, and I'm interested to see others' ideas. I also realize that, if implemented, it would require a fair amount of work from ANet.

For as long as I've been playing GW (little over a year) I've seen people that both claim to be excellent <insert any profession> and, when on teams with that person, appear to be awful <insert said earlier profession>.

For as long as I've been reading Guru (about a year) I've seen people complaining that

• no one wants <insert some profession> in a PuG
• too many people joining PuGs as <insert some profession> don't play very well
• too few people are joining PuGs for fear of grouping with bad players
• the PvE game is becoming too single-player for the above reasons.

So it's got me thinking ... how about a title you could display in towns to show your level of experience and understanding with your character?

I'm having a hard time sorting out how the exact details would work, but I envision a series of missions or quests that you may only do with henchman, thus, avoiding the ability to have other players power you through it. Each new fight or next step would require a significantly different strategy to beat. Upon completion of some of these tests, you get a new title, like "Advancing <primary profession>." Upon completion of all of them, you get a title, like "Apt <primary profession>."

I expect the test quests and henchmen skill sets would need to be different based on your primary class.

The purpose of these titles is so that if someone were looking to join a PuG they could see a, for example, "Advancing Warrior" and know that player has managed to beat a quest that requires he/she didn't over-extend/over-aggro while fighting on a hench team. They could see someone displaying "Apt Assassin" and know that person survived a whole set of tests specifically for an Assassin on a team. Please, don't anyone get offended. They're just the most recent examples that spring to mind. Any one person might play any one class exquisitely or terribly.

I realize you couldn't ever make a set of tests that proves how good someone is with every possible build and situation. And I don't think these tests should require too many different builds. But at least the tests could prove they're able to assess and handle a few basic, different situations that require some rather basic understanding of team fights in this game. With the right variation in hench skills, it might also indicate they're somewhat aware of the more critical skills from other professions.

Ideally, the tests would include henchman that call some of their actions. I'm thinking of things like spirits, shouts, enchantments, and hexes that significantly affect the situation even if you're not the one casting them.

I see the beginning of such a test on new Canthan characters with their profession insignia (I think that was it) training. That's a major step in the right direction. However, there's no title for that (I don't think,) nor do those challenges require the ability to work on a team.

The difficulty level should be appropriate for max (200 attribute points, level 20) characters and similar in difficulty to at least some of the harder situations you face in the main PvE storylines (not DoA, not UW, etc.) The Zaishen Challenge battles, imo, would be too hard for this.

This is not about who's the uber-leet whatever. It's about people that have shown enough of an understanding about their character that others can have some added confidence in them on PuG teams.

I think the title should be character-based because someone that can play a decent, again for example, Elementalist can not necessarily play a Monk so well. I don't think the title should involve the secondary profession. Ideally, the tests might even require us to use different secondary professions to complete.

Eventually (I'm sure and I hope) people would put up walkthroughs for each of these tests on places like wiki. What I'm hoping is that whoever writes the walkthrough has the presence of mind to include some discussion on why you're doing each step. At least then you'd know the title-wearer has invested enough of his/her effort in that character to read some general concepts of it on wiki.

I realize this could make it a lot harder for newer players to find groups later on in the game, but do you suppose that would help encourage them to learn more on their own or from friends rather than just sending them away? I know both people that I think should have these titles and people that I think should not. I'm hoping such an addition would help encourage the latter to learn more about their characters.


That's all for now. Agree/disagree/suggest/flame away!

Cheers,
Luny

I love this idea, though I think it would be horribly complicated to design and too easily bypassed. If Anet designed something like this, imagine the walkthroughs on wiki, the exact builds you need, and boom, suddenly the adept Echo Mending Wammo is still the same old Echo Mending Wammo, just with a title...
The tests could become subjective as well - this is too easy in some people's POV, and impossible in others'...but that's normal in anything that happens in this game, some people love it and some loathe it...
I'm not bashing your idea, /signing it actually, but it would have to have a lot of kinks worked out for it to help the PUG situation. It would definely be a step to help the PUGs out now.
What would be the most helpful though, is to just have honest players. I know I am an extremely adept Necromancer and Ritualist, and love playing the support classes, but I lack the hack-and-slash skills of an in your face Warrior. Being aware of your limitations is the real key here, but it's too bad the other 95% of GW won't admit they aren't as l33t as they think they are.

/signed again

Thanks for the feedback Erik!

Yeah, as soon as I started thinking about it I realized there'd never be any way to make it foolproof. I thought about suggesting the tests keep changing and you had to refresh your title to keep it, but that's just too hard for ANet ... and still not foolproof.

Even when it gets to the point you can single-build it or get away with things you're not supposed to be able to get away with, wouldn't it still be a basic indication of ability with your primary profession? I'm looking for a way to encourage players to think about both their own skills and working on a team with the other professions.

Maybe the echo mending wammo (to take your example) tries to pass this test, reads wiki, and begins to see that there are different, better ways available to him/her.

The people that could "break" the test ... they probably already know plenty about the professions in the first place.

*shrug* Maybe.

Oh, and if you can figure out a test and a title that only honest people could pass and earn ... wow, just about every problem in the whole game solved!

Luny

So, somebody is good in a PUG because they play well with henchies?

How about adding some useful tests.

- Fill in 64 slots to form a balanced team to fight in certain zone
- List the skills used by certain mob (timed test of course)
- Social aptitude test - solve a conflict within a group
- Convince a group that you can make a valuable group member
- Solve a guild issue regarding theft without involving Anet GMs

What you're proposing is essentialy cookie-cutter PUG stereotype test. How can you test my specific margonite shutdown build developed around Me/D skills? Why complain that b/p group doesn't take your mesmer, when you're the best mesmer there ever was? Is Healing Breeze a good skill (think of a 55, then think of GvG)?

PUGs are social concept, not a game mechanic. Nothing with regard to PUGs can be enforced. Socials skills > titles/money/ranks/tests. Each and every time.

And this test is already in game. It's called DoA. Of course, everyone will quickly point out, how that place is cookie-cutter heaven, and how that place sucks... Test failed, basically.

Another issue: If you're playing a monk, you need to know every other class well. To predict their damage, to know why warrior mustn't use healing sig + frenzy, to know why eles mustn't tank, or can tank with prot spirit/SoA or can't tank if there's enchant removal, or when to prot a ranger, and when a necro mustn't be healed since they use Grenth's balance. Monking requires indepth understanding of all other classes, and all attacks to be effective. Look at pvp healing and how it differentiates when going against different spikes and types of pressure. Look how healing differs in different parts of the game.

A warder must understand positioning and group dynamics to drop wards that will be even remotely useful, ranger must understand positioning so they have high ground, yet stay in monks range, and mesmers must place themself behind a wall to avoid direct attacks. A tank must know how to manage agro, yet know when to die and let others retreat. And so on... It's not the build that makes a great player. It's the player themself.

I sort of like the idea, but work would need to be done to make sure the quests showed aptitude with *your profession* and not just generic skill. Also, they should have some reward other than title. No henchmen though... some ideas (different dashes mean different mission/quests... you must complete all for max title. Note that advanced quests are not unlocked until all others are completed):

Warrior:
-Tanking: A group of spell casters is under attack. You must defend them from the enemy warriors and dervishes as they assault the area.
-Damage Dealing: You fight head to head against a level 20 warrior.
-Advanced Tanking: A group of spell casters is under attack. You must defend them from the enemy assassins and paragons as they assault the area.
-Advanced Damage Dealing: You must destroy the Dragon Egg (100 AL, 5,000 health, takes 50 damage on knockdown) while fighting off enemy monsters.

Monk:
-Healing: A warrior is fighting several mobs. You must keep him alive for the entire fight. You can not be targeted by the mobs.
-Protection: A warrior is fighting some mobs. If he loses more than 50 health from a single attack, the damage is tripled. You can not be targeted by the mobs.
-Smiting: An army of undead approaches friendly NPCs. You must assist them in the fight.
-Advanced Monking: An army of undead is assaulting a friendly warrior. The entire army must be defeated.

Assassin:
-Assassination: A war is raging. You must assassinate the enemy bosses.
-Infiltration: You must infiltrate an enemy base, kill the boss, and then exit. Use shadow steps and similar tactics to help you avoid aggro, as the abundance of monsters will easily kill you.
-Advanced Assassination: A war is raging. You must assassinate the enemy bosses before friendly forces are defeated.
-Advanced Infiltration: You must infiltrate an enemy base, kill the boss, and then exit. However, once the boss is killed, the base begins to crumble, causing massive stones to fall which cause knockdown and massive damage. After 10 minutes of this, the base will collapse.

Paragon:
-Field Command: Aid friendly forces with your shouts. They must win the battle.
-Combat: You must fight alongside a few NPCs to fight through enemy mobs.
-Advanced Field Command: Aid friendly forces with your shouts. Enemy assassins target only you.
-Advanced Combat: You must single handedly fight off enemy mobs.

Once you beat all four quests (about 20 minutes or so each), you get the title. You get 1 level for the title for every quest you complete.

No, at least that wasn't at all my intention. Someone is *less* risky in a PuG because they've passed some rather basic tests that (hopefully) require awareness of one's own skills, their teammates' skills, the battleground, and the opponents' skills.

It's certainly no guarantee of their personality or their honesty.

Please don't mistake me - I didn't suggest this because no one will let me in a PuG. I don't even try to join PuGs. I like groups with friends or henchies. My suggestion is something I was hoping would help all the people that seem to have so much trouble with and desire to participate in PuGs.

I like that idea, but it strikes me as too hard for newer players trying to learn their first character. Perhaps that could be another test for something like an Apt Partyleader title.

That's a good idea, too.

Well, if you're serious (which from the tone of your whole message, I doubt,) I think those are far too subjective to write a program to test. But I'd be very interested to read a proposal for how to test such a thing.

Please see above for why that's not what I'm doing, at least not what I'm trying to do.

No, really not. I'm talking about something A LOT easier than what I've heard DoA is like.

The "you cannot be targeted by mobs" makes this test completely useless. Monk may get targetted, or may even want to be targetted. If you get targetted, do you stand, kite or run away and let warrior die? Are you heal or prot? Can you bond, or smite? What about heal party e/mo?

These are all situations that not only do not apear in real combat, but also introduce some fictional situations. Why does warrior take triple damage? Does protection help? Guardian? Shield of judgement? What about spell breaker? Can you smite off tank to use AoE to scatter the mobs and prevent damage? Is tank using proper stances? Are they even equipped to fight that type of mobs? What about e-denial, hexes, different types of damage, AoE? What about target prioritization, synergetic builds between different types of monks, wards, aegis, weapon set switching to +30 energy? E-management, kiting and positioning, diversion and monk shutdown? Can you still heal when spiked by two rangers?

Is it really that easy to find out who a good player is? There is one test out there and that is GvG. Even the best guilds slowly wane and are replaced by better? So who is "good enough", who is "best" and who just plainly "sucks"?

The test of keeping someone alive is in pre-searing if you choose monk or monk secondary. That test is useless, since it tests your ability to use orison of healing once. During beta, that quest was much "harder", but was nerfed since so many were having big problems with healing a single NPC.

I'm serious, but my point was something else.

Good PUGs succeed because of good, rational and experienced players. They will agree on skills, strategy, but above all, realize who the good and bad members are from the start, learn how to deal with them, or reject them from the start.

PUGs deal with people, not skills. That is why they vary so much. A FoW farming build is always the same. And yet, many players had so many problems with it they gave up and were never able to play it. They had all the options, but simply didn't make it.

Social skills are what makes PUGs good. It starts by recruiting, the way groups seek members. It's further emphasized by pre-mission arrangement, balancing skills, learning about other players' attitude and aptitude, their gameplay style. Once you enter the mission, it's about adapting (passively and instantly) to others, their playstyle (who rushes in, who stands behind, who's lagging, who's using wrong skills, or pushing too far, who's confident, who's a first-timer, ...).

Aptitude test should be simple (but cannot be automatically implemented):
- Don't be an ass
- Don't be arrogant
- Be communicative
- Learn that some battles are best not fought
- Some people are unbearable
- You can always learn from others
- Agree to disagree, but follow the leader
- Have fun

Follow the above, and all PUGs will be great. There simply is no test that could validate it, except for word of mouth.

Why don't I mention ability to play a certain build? Well, if you enter a good group, and have positive attitude, they will advise you before and after on how to play, and you will listen and learn. And for that group, you'll be as good as it gets. You really don't need to be the leetest MM to make the best group member. Even if playing one for the first time, a good group will work around your mistakes, and emphasize your good sides.

That is the true test. You can't cheat it. Skills and your character just don't matter in the long run.

A) The reason why that test is NOT useless is because it assumes the warrior is capable of maintaining aggro. Technically you can be but the warrior NPC is based on maintaining aggro.
B) The warrior takes triple damage because this helps you learn to avoid spikes with protection.
C) Fictional scenarios? With Shiro's Meditation, you had to deal 500 damage to him which was absorbed and for every second you took, your entire party took a ton of damage. That was a real scenario, although compared to the rest of the game, it could have been considered "fictional" as you never have to do that elsewhere.
D) GvG skills do not equal PvE and PvP skills, only GvG skills. So since somebody is a good flag runner, they must be great at holding the Hall of Heroes right? They must be able to easily be a useful asset to that team attempting the Domain of Anguish? Nope.

First, sorry for doubting your sincerity Antheus. I simply couldn't tell for sure, and I was guessing. Really, no offense! I take it you're disagreeing with my proposal, but I'm just still not sure exactly why.

I agree that no test, no title could or should ever guarantee you'll be in a great PuG where everyone does things just right and has fun. There'll never be any way to guarantee that every group is great.

I agree that no amount of skill with the game's features will ever be a substitute for people skills.

I agree that a good group handles most mistakes without too much bother. I even grant that the way to get really good at playing on teams with other humans ... is by playing on teams other humans.

Will you agree that some all-too-common mistakes or misunderstandings made by a single party member can cause a wipe for an otherwise decent group? Will you agree that some people get pretty far in the game while thinking they've got it all figured out because the available henchies, PuGs, and/or friends have essentially carried them that far on their W/E with a fire staff using Fireball and Firestorm? (I'm not making that up, I've seen it happen.)

I don't think the tests I've proposed would discourage unusual builds, but I'm hoping they would encourage more people to really think about the possibilities and potential for their character in a team setting. And then, maybe, they'd be a little more comfortable standing up and working with teams of other people that appear to have done something similar.

I don't see how something like the tests I propose would hinder anyone from practicing the social grace and adaptability you suggest, Antheus. I hope the tests would be better ways to, well, force introduction to some both general battle concepts and some profession-specific concepts.

In the end, I hope the tests I propose would help bring more people out of their PuG-fear and get involved with the groups like you mention.

Antheus, do you see reasons why that would not be the case?

I don't accept GvG as an alternative solution. It requires they're interested in PvP, which isn't the case for everyone in this game. Even if interested in PvP, it would require new players get in a guild with enough like-minded people. Why not have some earlier, easier training?

Thanks,
Luny

Series,

I agree that the tests seem like they'd almost have to be different for each primary class.

As for reward, I hadn't really considered it, but X experience/Y gold/Z skill points seem ok to me. Do you think there should be something else? The "reward" I was thinking of was the ability to display the title to give others a little more confidence in your general abilities with that character.

I'm not comfortable on the idea of test situations like your monk cannot be targeted by the enemy. I'd hope that any monk wearing such a title knew that if he/she is there to heal or protect, then they shouldn't be the first ones attracting enemy attention.

I like the situations you suggest that would require, or at least encourage, you to use some of the more traditional, or originally intended roles of your class. Like Paragons assisting with chants and shouts, monks protecting, assassins popping in and out, etc.

And yes, you'd have to complete the first test to be able to try the second. Though I think it would be more useful if you were allowed to switch builds in between.

Thanks,
Luny

There is one very good reason to NEVER implement this. How many of you have ever tried to get a group in hoh? You'll note that everyone is spamming Rank [insert # here] lfg! And no one will group with someone of a lower rank than them. This is just an extension of that. I hope that this is never implemented because it would just be a way of classifying people should it be successful and work the way it's supposed to. And if it doesn't work the way it's supposed to then it would be redundant.

*bad idea stamp*