20 Man Mythic: Success or Failure?

[Bonezerker]

I think the above 2 posts illustrate why having a fixed size for Mythic was desirable for many.

[Mahourai]

It doesn't matter whether 10s were tuned tighter overall than 25s (they weren't in the Cataclysm/MoP era) or whether 10 had some fights that were tougher than 25 (it did) because being the hardest isn't an accomplishment or evidence that 10 deserved to survive over 25 or vice versa.

[Deja Thoris]

I think the above 2 posts illustrate why having a fixed size for Mythic was desirable for many.

Yes, me being a forum neckbeard was totally a good reason to kill off a raiding format. Darn those posts destroying peoples enjoyment of a format!

[Bonezerker]

Yes, me being a forum neckbeard was totally a good reason to kill off a raiding format. Darn those posts destroying peoples enjoyment of a format!

Well, I've already said that being in a raid that is too small for Mythic myself, I think that it would be a good idea for Blizzard to open up Mythic to flex a few months after all the top guilds have cleared it. That way during the time frame when an even playing field actually matters, nobody has an advantage, but after progression is over and the top guilds have their bragging rights, smaller guilds like mine have more content to do.

Either way I don't really care at this point. If mythic remains a fixed 20 man, I'll clear my heroic raids and then focus on mythic+ 5-mans.

[access5]

It killed my guild. It killed multiple guilds that my friends were in.

It was a failure.

Yep, this.

[caervek]

Have you actually checked the data?
I did. But I stopped after the first boss of his "data".

His number: Kargath Bladefist: 1,646 guilds a week, 31,274 over 19 weeks.
Actual wowprogress number: M: Kargath Bladefist 15682 (22.54%)

So yeah.

If you had bothered to read it then you would see the number is over 19 weeks:

All data is taken from WoW Progress, and I've specifically used the dates when each raid would have been moved on from. Those dates are listed as the first piece of data and essentially go from when the Mythic tier is available, to when the next heroic tier is available.

>.>

- - - Updated - - -

I would argue that ten man isn't sustainable though. MoP really showed the limits

10m was killing off 25m, that was one of the reasons Blizzard switched to fixed 20m, because they didn't want to see the death of large scale raiding (even if it was what the playerbase was moving towards).

- - - Updated - - -

Ten just can't do difficult content as well.

Some fights were harder on 10m, some were harder on 25m, overall most raids averaged out even. The isn't an encounter in WoD that couldn't have been done with 10m and been almost as hard/easy. The only real standout is Blast Furnace and only because it uses a Naxx40 mechanic that had already been improved upon by Naxx10.

[primalmatter]

A guild that cleared Dragon Soul in 6 months would have been world 5500. A guild that cleared Hellfire Citadel in 6 months would be world 600. Mythic raiding is not sustainable for the majority of guilds. They cannibalize each other and disband due to recruiting pressure. You can argue this is a good thing, in that it winnows out all the middling hardmode progression guilds I suppose, but that's nothing to do with whether it's sustainable.



Who cares? What about it? Why is this important enough to eliminate one format? "10-man cannot be allowed to exist because Thok was undertuned." Try saying this out loud and seeing how it sounds.



I'm not sure what you mean, as Norushen week one was defeated by zerging it down and people ignoring the mechanics of the encounter. This is certainly hard in one sense, but Norushen was mechanically tuned UP by the changes that required people to actually obey the fight design.



No, we didn't. There was no "struggle" or "breakdown" in 10-man participation or design.

Only 25 man could be zerged down. Something like 50 guilds total managed to get passed it in the first week it was heavily nerfed after to allow the zerg strat in ten man as well.

[Deleted]

All that and nothing relevant to the quality of the raids. I have said in an earlier post that all of WoD is shit besides the raiding. Try not to hurt yourself just because you cant accept blizzard did something right.

On another note for all my years of raiding I have never had an easier time doing mythic/old heroic on multiple alts.

So one less raid in WOD after saying due to the one size they were gonna be able to do more raids it is not relevant?
What does it take for you to admit you have been lied by blizzard?
Do you need to have just 2 raids in Legion to notice?
BTW i never had a problem admiting all the things blizzard did right, but that it is not an excuse for closing my eyes when they lie to me.

[stevenho]

If you had bothered to read it then you would see the number is over 19 weeks:

Yeah, and extrapolated data is meaningless.
Compare actual numbers in a raid tier lasting as long, say SoO to HFC, and by the end of WoD the numbers will be equal even though subs are at roughly half of what they were in SoO.

[Deleted]

Yeah, and extrapolated data is meaningless.
Compare actual numbers in a raid tier lasting as long, say SoO to HFC, and by the end of WoD the numbers will be equal even though subs are at roughly half of what they were in SoO.

You could also realise one of you is measuring participation and the other completion.

Totally different metrics.

[caervek]

Yeah, and extrapolated data is meaningless.

Hence why a specific range was used and not extrapolation. I even quoted the bit you had missed for you >.>

Compare actual numbers in a raid tier lasting as long, say SoO to HFC, and by the end of WoD the numbers will be equal even though subs are at roughly half of what they were in SoO.

That's a terrible way of doing it and will just result in garbage data. The whole reason the dates for the data collection run from when the Mythic tier is available to when the next heroic tier would be available (if it wasn't the last tier) is because that's the relevant part.

Extending the range to give end of expansion numbers just produces irrelevant garbage because mythic SoO never got as easy as mythic HFC has become. If you add in all the people who only managed to kill a load of bosses in SoO due to 4/4 upgrades or new talents and add in all the people who only managed to kill a load of bosses in mythic HFC because you can trivialize it by getting everyone a i795 super ring by farming valor in 5mans then of course the numbers for HFC participation will be pulled up more than the SoO ones.

Including data form after a raid becomes trivialized is a bad idea when you're trying to get a comparison of participation numbers because some raids get trivialized more than others.

[kary]

Hence why a specific range was used and not extrapolation. I even quoted the bit you had missed for you >.>




That's a terrible way of doing it and will just result in garbage data. The whole reason the dates for the data collection run from when the Mythic tier is available to when the next heroic tier would be available (if it wasn't the last tier) is because that's the relevant part. Extrapolating it as you want (didn't you say "extrapolated data is meaningless"? :S) to give end of expansion numbers just produces irrelevant garbage because mythic SoO never got as easy as mythic HFC is.

It's kinda hard to say that HFC is easier, tbh.
Ring stacking is a phenomenon unique to this tier. Basically unless your raid is stacked with manno/archi trinket 4pc tier fully upgraded ring wielding mages / rogue equivalent, you aint gonna have that much ease progressing.

[caervek]

Ring stacking is a phenomenon unique to this tier. Basically unless your raid is stacked with manno/archi trinket 4pc tier fully upgraded ring wielding mages / rogue equivalent, you aint gonna have that much ease progressing.

That's the point, you can get manno/archi trinket 4pc tier and a fully upgraded ring without even walking into mythic, it gives a massive boost. I have seen mythic PUGs walk over hellfire assault and reaver who would have wiped on lolmerseus.

[primalmatter]

That's the point, you can get manno/archi trinket 4pc tier and a fully upgraded ring without even walking into mythic, it gives a massive boost. I have seen mythic PUGs walk over hellfire assault and reaver who would have wiped on lolmerseus.

Yeah the ring is a stronger nerf then the old % nerf aura of old dungeons it allows you to cheese phases of the fight and is pretty game breaking.

[Raiju]

It's kinda hard to say that HFC is easier, tbh.
Ring stacking is a phenomenon unique to this tier. Basically unless your raid is stacked with manno/archi trinket 4pc tier fully upgraded ring wielding mages / rogue equivalent, you aint gonna have that much ease progressing.

Ring makes some fights comparable to 6.0 SoO, so it certainly isn't hard to say HFC's easier as a result.

[kary]

That's the point, you can get manno/archi trinket 4pc tier and a fully upgraded ring without even walking into mythic, it gives a massive boost. I have seen mythic PUGs walk over hellfire assault and reaver who would have wiped on lolmerseus.

Keyword there being stacked. One arcane mage with gear a difference will not make.
And I dunno about immerseus, tbh. Sell runs on illidan with 10/25 carries used to do immerseus on heroic.

And the ring requires a significant time investment.

People who are speed clearing aren't progressing.

[Niwes]

Blizzard claimed that a 20 man strict limit would allow them to create boss fights with unique mechanics.

Never happened. Mythic WOD were not so different from previous top tier bosses. There were no "unique" mechanics or innovative designs. It was all just a lie by Blizzard to make it easier for them to balance the fights.

yep. sad but true.

personally i am very pro-20m. do not like 10m to have in game by various reasons (most of them were already discussed here).

but the argument of blizz mentioned above, is since they said it, non-existent in game.

i still waitin for their (look at apropriate blue post) mechanics, where also class skills can shine, like sheep, banish, etc (or cc in general), or missdirects. also the never existing mechanics, which should favor class strengths, like kiting. this all never happened.

the simple truth is this: they no longer do encounters like that. they also no longer do encounters with switch-mechanics (press things in an encounter at the same time, or in correct order etc) nor they do vehicle fights (not cheap enough to design and build).

all they do is movement encounters. why ? because they are cheap to design, and easy to scale. or in short: they are most efficient time-and-money-wise for blizzard.

simple and sad as that.

[Thorim]

Given, that Mythic is your target, normal and heroic are not progression. They are an introduction. Mythic is progression. Doing heroic for Mythic raider is an equivalent of reading dungeon journal.


I didn't even have to watch the video to point out the issue - raind comp was enough :P

Arcane mages are broken. It's not fault of the encounter that class design sucks when it comes to scaling. Both Arcane mages and Rogues have complete out of this world openers. If you stack them at this point of gear, most bosses will be a joke.

But people are saying that class representation is one of the big reasons 20 man is such an amazing idea......and all those cool class specific mechanics they were going to add meaning you had to have one of each class in the raid....right?

- - - Updated - - -

SoO Mythic equivalent was heroic and it was never flex.


I'm quite sure I've written about it already in this topic but I'll repeat.

Gorefiend. Prolly the most fun ecnounter I have ever done. In a different raid size it would lose a lot from its charm and most likely in the difficulty as the whole trick of this encounter is coordination of 20 people.

Furnace in BRF required quite a coordination as well.

Those are from the top of my head. To write more I would have to analize more fights. Anyway, this fixed size opens a lot more space for ideas than having to balance between sizes. The best fights are those that require coordination of all raid members and to do that in a bigger raid size is the treat.

- - - Updated - - -


Have you done Gorefiend or skipped it?
Also Iskar would lose it's main difficulty in lower raid size. Socrethar needs around 4 people to deal with interrupts. Xhul needs a group of 4 people to deal with chains (regadless of available classes it might be easier or harder to coordinate).

What new and interesting mechanics did Gorefiend bring exactly....they did the whole 'go into another realm and kill/tank/heal adds thing only last expac on sha, and there have been many other bosses with similar mechanics. The way they made it sound at blizzcon and in Q&As was that the team had a lot of actually new and interesting mechanics which were IMPOSSIBLE to do on two raid sizes....

[Niwes]

But people are saying that class representation is one of the big reasons 20 man is such an amazing idea......and all those cool class specific mechanics they were going to add meaning you had to have one of each class in the raid....right?

- - - Updated - - -



What new and interesting mechanics did Gorefiend bring exactly....they did the whole 'go into another realm and kill/tank/heal adds thing only last expac on sha, and there have been many other bosses with similar mechanics. The way they made it sound at blizzcon and in Q&As was that the team had a lot of actually new and interesting mechanics which were IMPOSSIBLE to do on two raid sizes....

even if its sarcasm, i just have to repeat: there are no special class mechanics used in anyway, since blizz have said they would do that. it never had and never will happen (look at the Legion raids, all movement encounters like since 3-4 years, and i saw nowhere used class mechanics).

- - - Updated - - -

What new and interesting mechanics did Gorefiend bring exactly....they did the whole 'go into another realm and kill/tank/heal adds thing only last expac on sha, and there have been many other bosses with similar mechanics. The way they made it sound at blizzcon and in Q&As was that the team had a lot of actually new and interesting mechanics which were IMPOSSIBLE to do on two raid sizes....

exactly this.

since they came up with their "on 20m we can use special class stuff blah blah" they never did it. not in 1 fukin encounter.

and every single existing raid encounter since then, had NOTHING preventing him from doin at 10m. not a single one.

and this is said by someone (me) who do not like 10m at all.

[stevenho]

Including data form after a raid becomes trivialized is a bad idea when you're trying to get a comparison of participation numbers because some raids get trivialized more than others.

Nah.
It is meaningless to "simulate" what would happen if tier X lasted Y days compared to tier Z.
It is also meaningless to discuss whether SoO was or was not harder than other raids.

What is meaningful is the actual number of people that participated, and the number is the same despite big sub loss.