Do people not solo early guardian raids?

[JayaND]

The reason for the post title is that awhile back, I received an achievement called "Everyone Okay?". It is an achievement for clearing a guardian raid 20 times without anyone in the party getting killed. I figured it is an natural achievement to get if one is solo playing Guardian raids. Since I am only level 430, I am only doing that level GR in Vern. And so receiving this achievement was not a surprise since clearing the raid solo automatically starts adding up to the 20 times. What surprised me was that only 1.2% of players had this. Does this mean people don't typically play even the early guardian raids solo? Or do they hone their items so fast, they don't bother with the early raids and only care for later ones where they need a party to clear.

Just curious since I find solo playing the GRs to be quite fun. It is much more interesting than the Abyssal dungeons where almost always the other players are much higher than me and they one shot the beast and we finish.

[Jango]

Think it just has to do with the mats you receive when completing certain guardian raids in the t1 and t2 areas.
and since only being able to complete them twice a day people don't wanna miss out on the better mats if they are farther ahead in lvl.

To solo some of them was a pretty big thing as a support class and also certain bosses was pretty amazing to do at the time. I believe some still do it with valganos?
I guess people in the t3 area just don't do old content enough or would wanna waste their chance on getting lower tier mats.
It is also very nice seeing all the Mokokos running around so seems like the game is still getting new and returning players :D Glad to see

[lizzo(overturned bans x 69)]

the game isn't really getting new players is what jango is trying to say. seems fun now with all the horizontal content but end game only consist of doing legion raids and getting gated.

[JayaND]

Thanks for the comments. I just find the solo to be very refreshing since you can challenge yourself without worrying about getting in the way of others. I think I will continue to solo raids for awhile just to use it as a way to get better, which for me is a difficult road. Its the same reason I don't try to hone material so that it can keep the mission challenging. I went into a Chaos Gate and found out I was alone with my item level just barely being accepted into the gate. As you can imagine I got my backside handed to me. However I am noticing I am slowly progressing, even if I don't hone up my mats so even if I lose each time, its worthwhile for me.

[-Dare Devil/x/]

Originally posted by JayaND:

Thanks for the comments. I just find the solo to be very refreshing since you can challenge yourself without worrying about getting in the way of others. I think I will continue to solo raids for awhile just to use it as a way to get better, which for me is a difficult road. Its the same reason I don't try to hone material so that it can keep the mission challenging. I went into a Chaos Gate and found out I was alone with my item level just barely being accepted into the gate. As you can imagine I got my backside handed to me. However I am noticing I am slowly progressing, even if I don't hone up my mats so even if I lose each time, its worthwhile for me.

-As long as you're having fun! I would also recommend joining the official or unofficial discord and lurk on conversations. I learned a lot just by listening to guildies chat.

[PandaSav]

wait till you reach t3 guardians and soloing them will eat through your battle items. Unless you are whale geared!

[JayaND]

It will be a while before I get to T3 but thanks for the advice. Probably will need to make sure my characters are at least well equipped to be able to participate in group raids. No whale here. If I was a whale, I probably would be much higher.

[SweetStarfieldFan]

Originally posted by JayaND:

The reason for the post title is that awhile back, I received an achievement called "Everyone Okay?". It is an achievement for clearing a guardian raid 20 times without anyone in the party getting killed. I figured it is an natural achievement to get if one is solo playing Guardian raids. Since I am only level 430, I am only doing that level GR in Vern. And so receiving this achievement was not a surprise since clearing the raid solo automatically starts adding up to the 20 times. What surprised me was that only 1.2% of players had this. Does this mean people don't typically play even the early guardian raids solo? Or do they hone their items so fast, they don't bother with the early raids and only care for later ones where they need a party to clear.

Just curious since I find solo playing the GRs to be quite fun. It is much more interesting than the Abyssal dungeons where almost always the other players are much higher than me and they one shot the beast and we finish.

Haven't you considered the implications of mathematical statistics, the millions of bots in the game, and the number of Steam installations? No wonder you're asking that question – it's important to recognize that these percentages might not be the most reliable indicators.

[-Dare Devil/x/]

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

Originally posted by JayaND:

The reason for the post title is that awhile back, I received an achievement called "Everyone Okay?". It is an achievement for clearing a guardian raid 20 times without anyone in the party getting killed. I figured it is an natural achievement to get if one is solo playing Guardian raids. Since I am only level 430, I am only doing that level GR in Vern. And so receiving this achievement was not a surprise since clearing the raid solo automatically starts adding up to the 20 times. What surprised me was that only 1.2% of players had this. Does this mean people don't typically play even the early guardian raids solo? Or do they hone their items so fast, they don't bother with the early raids and only care for later ones where they need a party to clear.

Just curious since I find solo playing the GRs to be quite fun. It is much more interesting than the Abyssal dungeons where almost always the other players are much higher than me and they one shot the beast and we finish.

Haven't you considered the implications of mathematical statistics, the millions of bots in the game, and the number of Steam installations? No wonder you're asking that question – it's important to recognize that these percentages might not be the most reliable indicators.

-You said a ton of words in a really weird condescending way. I'm not really sure why you type like that, to make people feel dumb? lol.

-More specifically and more realistically, its generally accepted knowledge that Steam achievements are not too reliable for any Steam game that is free to play or any paid Steam game that has had a "free weekend".

[SweetStarfieldFan]

Originally posted by -Dare Devil/x/:

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

Haven't you considered the implications of mathematical statistics, the millions of bots in the game, and the number of Steam installations? No wonder you're asking that question – it's important to recognize that these percentages might not be the most reliable indicators.

-You said a ton of words in a really weird condescending way. I'm not really sure why you type like that, to make people feel dumb? lol.

-More specifically and more realistically, its generally accepted knowledge that Steam achievements are not too reliable for any Steam game that is free to play or any paid Steam game that has had a "free weekend".

-My intention was simply to shed light on overlooked aspects; education, not condescension, drives my discourse. You're welcome, and I'm here to help.

-While it's true that free-to-play games may have less reliable achievement percentages, it's crucial to consider the more significant factor at play here: the presence of bots. Bots distort achievement percentages regardless of the game's payment model, as they artificially inflate the number of players and skew the distribution of achievements. The root of the issue lies in the bots' impact on the data, not the game's free-to-play status.

-It's quite amusing, albeit puzzling, that someone would attempt to shift the blame for incorrect percentages to something as trivial as the payment model, when the more substantial factor is undoubtedly the presence of bots. Regardless, I'm glad I had the opportunity to correct this misconception here.

[JayaND]

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

Haven't you considered the implications of mathematical statistics, the millions of bots in the game, and the number of Steam installations? No wonder you're asking that question – it's important to recognize that these percentages might not be the most reliable indicators.

This is a good point. And not only is it the bots but the players who played the game and then quite before reaching Lvl 50 and North Vern. If one removes these numbers, this value may go up quite a bit.

This actually makes more sense since I felt that others probably played solo through some guardian raids and it doesn't take much to stack 20 of them.

[-Dare Devil/x/]

Originally posted by JayaND:

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

Haven't you considered the implications of mathematical statistics, the millions of bots in the game, and the number of Steam installations? No wonder you're asking that question – it's important to recognize that these percentages might not be the most reliable indicators.

This is a good point. And not only is it the bots but the players who played the game and then quite before reaching Lvl 50 and North Vern. If one removes these numbers, this value may go up quite a bit.

This actually makes more sense since I felt that others probably played solo through some guardian raids and it doesn't take much to stack 20 of them.

-Aye, exactly. Its all those people who launched the game, got one achievement, then quit and every variation of anyone quitting before ever doing guardian raids and also bots of course since they do the same thing since its free to play and very easy for it to occur.

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

Originally posted by -Dare Devil/x/:

-You said a ton of words in a really weird condescending way. I'm not really sure why you type like that, to make people feel dumb? lol.

-More specifically and more realistically, its generally accepted knowledge that Steam achievements are not too reliable for any Steam game that is free to play or any paid Steam game that has had a "free weekend".

-My intention was simply to shed light on overlooked aspects; education, not condescension, drives my discourse. You're welcome, and I'm here to help.

-While it's true that free-to-play games may have less reliable achievement percentages, it's crucial to consider the more significant factor at play here: the presence of bots. Bots distort achievement percentages regardless of the game's payment model, as they artificially inflate the number of players and skew the distribution of achievements. The root of the issue lies in the bots' impact on the data, not the game's free-to-play status.

-It's quite amusing, albeit puzzling, that someone would attempt to shift the blame for incorrect percentages to something as trivial as the payment model, when the more substantial factor is undoubtedly the presence of bots. Regardless, I'm glad I had the opportunity to correct this misconception here.

-You are so focused on ♥♥♥♥ talking the game that you are being blind to facts.

-The main point and reason is that the game is free to play. That is literally WHY achievements will have such small % completions. Go look at any free to play game for proof. That's just how it is. However I also do agree that bots will ADD ON to the % getting even smaller.

-I also don't understand why you talk in a whimsical way in like some sort of second/third person tense when responding directly to my post with some sort of presumption statement of having opportunities. Do you always try to type super condescendingly? Because it definitely feels out of the ordinary to how most people communicate on the Steam hub and video game forums.

-By the way, they aren't "incorrect" percentages in a pure data sense, but they are a misleading metric should someone try to make a conclusion about game state from them. And if they did, they would have to disclaimer the conclusions probably.

[SweetStarfieldFan]

Originally posted by -Dare Devil/x/:

wall of text

It's clear that OP grasped my points and agreed with them, so my approach seems to have been effective. If my response has upset you, that's an issue on your end. As for the game, it speaks for itself, and I've merely presented the facts. There's no need for any unsavory language or hostility. Let's just stick to the facts and civil discussions. Cheers!

[Mickk]

Originally posted by ;3820783808433305671:

Originally posted by LostArkLover:

-My intention was simply to shed light on overlooked aspects; education, not condescension, drives my discourse. You're welcome, and I'm here to help.

-While it's true that free-to-play games may have less reliable achievement percentages, it's crucial to consider the more significant factor at play here: the presence of bots. Bots distort achievement percentages regardless of the game's payment model, as they artificially inflate the number of players and skew the distribution of achievements. The root of the issue lies in the bots' impact on the data, not the game's free-to-play status.

-It's quite amusing, albeit puzzling, that someone would attempt to shift the blame for incorrect percentages to something as trivial as the payment model, when the more substantial factor is undoubtedly the presence of bots. Regardless, I'm glad I had the opportunity to correct this misconception here.

-You are so focused on ♥♥♥♥ talking the game that you are being blind to facts.

-The main point and reason is that the game is free to play. That is literally WHY achievements will have such small % completions. Go look at any free to play game for proof. That's just how it is. However I also do agree that bots will ADD ON to the % getting even smaller.

-I also don't understand why you talk in a whimsical way in like some sort of second/third person tense when responding directly to my post with some sort of presumption statement of having opportunities. Do you always try to type super condescendingly? Because it definitely feels out of the ordinary to how most people communicate on the Steam hub and video game forums.

-By the way, they aren't "incorrect" percentages in a pure data sense, but they are a misleading metric should someone try to make a conclusion about game state from them. And if they did, they would have to disclaimer the conclusions probably.

Thank you -Dare Devil/x/ for speaking out about the condescending manner in which that person posts.
I don't really respond here any more because of the manner in which a few people repeatedly post here. I do still read this forum and respond when I feel it is appropriate but I tend not to post as that seems to end up in nonconstructive arguments.

I can see how easily someone new coming to this forum would get the wrong impression of this game.

[Teal V2]

You just got the percent of how many are actually players from player-count.

Welcome in bot-ark.

[Tenma]

im new player just reached 50 and i keep seeing ppl saying that north vern makes new player quit, ngl now i wonder why