3 tiers in 3 years

[Brewhan]

look at that beauty that is TBC good times indeed my favorite in WoW was a great raid schedule I had then never got burned out even when rushing realm first on server.

[Deficineiron]

Is there a point to this thread? I'm genuinely curious.

The graph is interesting. A picture is worth 1000 words. This graph says it all.

[Buildapanda]

and for 3 years people that apparently hate WoW have been hanging around these forums complaining about it.

Something seems a tad pathetic about that

Yeah I know, but that's up for debate on what's pathetic LOL

[Lady Mormont]

something i see wrong with this is that in TBC launch, all of T4, all of T5, and Hyjal was already out, it all just required attunements and proper gear acquisition (rather that be dps/tank/healer checks or resist gear) kinda hard to evaluate how long a tier truly lasted then. The only thing you can truly evaluate is the combination of the aforementioned prior to BT, BT prior to Sunwell, and Sunwell prior to WotLK.

[Roccatex]

and for 3 years people that apparently hate WoW have been hanging around these forums complaining about it.

Something seems a tad pathetic about that

quite the opposite, they still care even after 3 years, which shows how much they love this game.The game is on it's lowest right now.People don't cry for no reason, they know how good this game was and want that feeling back.

What gets out of hand is the demand for legacy servers.That will be the coffin for WoW if they ever did this, we really don't need them, but the quality of what vanilla/tbc was, thats what we need in future patches/expansions.

[Deficineiron]

something i see wrong with this is that in TBC launch, all of T4, all of T5, and Hyjal was already out, it all just required attunements and proper gear acquisition (rather that be dps/tank/healer checks or resist gear) kinda hard to evaluate how long a tier truly lasted then. The only thing you can truly evaluate is the combination of the aforementioned prior to BT, BT prior to Sunwell, and Sunwell prior to WotLK.

both classic and tbc are a bit hard to evaluate compared to later expansions due to the progression system they had in place. the catch-up 2.3 and 2.4 badge stuff, while quite radical at the time, looks quite slow and onerous by comparison now.

as you likely know, just because 2.1 had bt, doesn't mean most raiding guilds were already farming ssc + tk + mhj. matters were quite different.

the graph is highly useful with later expansions, and it is spot on for 4.0+++.

the 250-day scale is poorly thought out. Who measures years in 250-day increments?

- - - Updated - - -

quite the opposite, they still care even after 3 years, which shows how much they love this game.The game is on it's lowest right now.People don't cry for no reason, they know how good this game was and want that feeling back.

What gets out of hand is the demand for legacy servers.That will be the coffin for WoW if they ever did this, we really don't need them, but the quality of what vanilla/tbc was, thats what we need in future patches/expansions.

you don't think the chart you are looking at, specifically the last 2 expansion/tiers, are the coffin? I don't care what the blizzblues sing this time around - that chart is a game with a major drop in development effort. Heck, you have one major patch this expansion!! How can anyone think that this, not a private server problem and forum threads, isn't the single greatest threat to wow?

I intellectual knew things had really slowed down but that image tells a story worse than I had 'known.'

[Nemah]

There's nothing left to do but take our own lives.

This is my favorite post ever.

[khazmodan]

and for 3 years people that apparently hate WoW have been hanging around these forums complaining about it.

Something seems a tad pathetic about that

almost as pathetic as being a blizzard fan boy even when they are lazier and less responsive than ever to the quickly diminishing community. I suspect that most of the fanboys are either paid by blizzard or just blinder wearing contrarians without the ability to observe what is happening and make an intelligent conclusion.

[Freedom]

FIVE Vanilla tiers...? Huh? I count MC, BWL, AQ40, and Naxx. Four. Is he counting ZG as a tier? If ZG counts for a tier, shouldn't Zul'Aman? Where's the fifth tier for BC?

Interesting graphic nonetheless.

[Qck]

As much as I love Vanilla, I find that chart questionable.

The game only shipped with MC + Onyxia. Which is a pretty weak raid tier by today's standards.

If Vanilla were released today it would look more like : Tier 1 (MC/Onyxia/BWL) Tier 2 (AQ 20/40), Tier 3 (Naxx). So that basically leaves it on the same par as MoP.

I mean MC had a lot of bosses and a separate tier set to Ony/BWL.

You also missed ZG somewhere in there. Not a full tier but certainly extra raid content.

[Starscream101]

look at that beauty that is TBC good times indeed my favorite in WoW was a great raid schedule I had then never got burned out even when rushing realm first on server.

I agree 100% BC then Wrath great times then Cata came and game has gone down hill from there.

[Super Kami Dende]

almost as pathetic as being a blizzard fan boy even when they are lazier and less responsive than ever to the quickly diminishing community. I suspect that most of the fanboys are either paid by blizzard or just blinder wearing contrarians without the ability to observe what is happening and make an intelligent conclusion.

If I enjoy the game it doesn't matter how "lazy" you perceive Blizzard to be, because I'm still having fun.

Stay mad.

[Richardbro]

I still love the content that blizzard delivers and I find all of it to be top quality and still play wow, but I dont think anyone could deny that Blizzard has been pathetic in releasing content since SoO considering the size of their development team.

[High Marshal Sigismund]

If they fuck up in Legion and give us a dreadful amount of post-release content, that'll be it for me. It will basically confirm that they are full of shit and only feeding players PR talk lies to minimize losses. Hopefully that is not the case.

[Taeldorian]

"We are doing our best to reduce content drought and the time it takes between expansions"

But they don't realize that the reason the content drought was shorter was due to way more tiers. Had 4-5 going from bc to wrath to cata, than 3 from cata to mop, than 2 in wod. Why are the content droughts so long? Personally based on the graph alone (not the only deciding factor though) that the more content patches/tiers there are in one expac, the less amount of time we have to spend in one tier, which shortens the dreaded content drought. This seems obvious though, so I feel stupid writing it.

Either way, I don't hate on Blizzard usually unless they do something really stupid (WoD), but this graph basically shows that content droughts are cut shorter by adding more content, which is blatantly obvious. I wonder what approach they would use other than this to shorten the drought like they said.

[Uurdz]

I've been a staunch Blizz supporter but this stuff has gone too far.

Yeah I'm with you. I've loved blizzard for 15 years. Now I'm sad about the state of WoW and blame Blizzard for fucking it up. It's like my coke dealer of a decade started cutting my supply up an adding "jims authentic cola" kinda tastes the same but now there is too much of jims cola and it starts to taste like jims ass.

[Sury]

It really seems like calling Blackrock the same tier as Highmaul kinda bites Blizzard in the ass in terms of perception.

I mean, look at Tier 9. Five bosses. Tier 12? 7 bosses. And so on. Some tiers were indeed huge, but some of them for the wrong reasons. (Naxx rehash comes to mind)

Yet Highmaul is 7 bosses and "half a tier". Foundry is TEN bosses and still..."half a tier".

I agree with this line of thought. Tier is not a great measuring tape of how many raid encounters are available for each expansion. The number of raid encounters themselves including rehashed raids (Naxx and Onyxia) would make for a more interesting measurement.

Cataclysm had 30 indoor raid encounter (31 if you include Sinestra).
Warlords had 30 indoor raid encounters (34 if you include world bosses).

Both had similar expansion lengths and followed two of the longest end of expansion raids to date.

That graph in no ways shows the entire picture.

[sanchoz]

as sub numbers decrease its going to get harder and harder for Blizz to justify investing money into the game. this is just the beginning of content droughts unfortunately..

[Mullet Man]

I agree with this line of thought. Tier is not a great measuring tape of how many raid encounters are available for each expansion. The number of raid encounters themselves including rehashed raids (Naxx and Onyxia) would make for a more interesting measurement.

Cataclysm had 30 indoor raid encounter (31 if you include Sinestra).
Warlords had 30 indoor raid encounters (34 if you include world bosses).

Both had similar expansion lengths and followed two of the longest end of expansion raids to date.

That graph in no ways shows the entire picture.

More details per this r/wow post:
https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment...ll_drop_i_put/
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets...it?usp=sharing

These numbers look even worse.

[Lamora]

These numbers look even worse.

They look worse because they try to make them look worse. Can someone list the 9 raids of vanilla for example?