Can we agree, multiple raid difficulties killed some of the epicness of raiding?

[Glorious Leader]

It would not. If you want relevant non raiding content you have first reduce easy acess into raiding. If LFR outshine by its rewards and easy difficulty rest of the game there is no point even bother with non raiding content. Just imagine new player what just dinged fresh lvl 100. All he can do now is asrhan for itemlvl to acess LFR then hfc lfr clear it and leave game or keep replaying same raid over and over. At this moment huge amounth of expansion is absolote becouse how todays players are forced into 1 only relevant content which is very end game raid.

Then the issue is not lfr the issue is raiding itself. Raiding g invalidates all non raid content.

[Nobleshield]

Then the issue is not lfr the issue is raiding itself. Raiding g invalidates all non raid content.

Raiding doesn't have to invalidate everything else, the problem is that WoW as a game is built around raiding, and worse it's built around the idea that the current tier of raiding is all that matters. There can/should be alternate ways of gearing (likely take you longer, but still) to cater to everybody: The solo player who wants to go and kill the dragon alone like Conan, the tiny group (e.g. a couple who plays together, or a group of 3 friends), the small group (e.g. 5 people), and the guild who wants to run events together (10+). The content should scale to accommodate all of those people and at the same time allow for different levels of progress without it being all or nothing like it currently is. The problem now is there's no reason really to go back to an older raid tier within the same expansion, and as a result anyone doing so is labelled as a "scrub guild" or similar derogatory language. That's the problem. it should be okay to still be working on Blackrock Foundry, maybe dabbling in a boss or two in HFC.

[Jaylock]

Raiding doesn't have to invalidate everything else, the problem is that WoW as a game is built around raiding, and worse it's built around the idea that the current tier of raiding is all that matters. There can/should be alternate ways of gearing (likely take you longer, but still) to cater to everybody: The solo player who wants to go and kill the dragon alone like Conan, the tiny group (e.g. a couple who plays together, or a group of 3 friends), the small group (e.g. 5 people), and the guild who wants to run events together (10+). The content should scale to accommodate all of those people and at the same time allow for different levels of progress without it being all or nothing like it currently is. The problem now is there's no reason really to go back to an older raid tier within the same expansion, and as a result anyone doing so is labelled as a "scrub guild" or similar derogatory language. That's the problem. it should be okay to still be working on Blackrock Foundry, maybe dabbling in a boss or two in HFC.

I'm going to have to agree with you on all points here.

Content within an expansion shouldn't be made irrelevant when the next content patch comes. For all its "flaws" TBC had it right, people were on all tiers and paths of progression all expansion long. The newly formed guild half way through the expansion started on Kara, and moved on up (usually quicker than the first guilds because of better geared players, catch up mechanics and such), and all guilds in between.

[Jewsco]

If we accept this then removing mythic would do much thr same with less harm. The actual specific mode is not the issue it's the raid content as a whole.

I would say tuning and designing mythic cost more in development than tuning for lfr. They actually add new mechanics and such to mythic. Lfr is just nerfing what they already had made. Add in way more people do lfr than mythic if the game is going to remove anything it would make sense to remove mythic. How removing anything adds more to the game is beyond me. The call should be for blizz to add more not cut. Last I checked an expansion is suppose to expand and what we already have not cut which wod did. So can people blame the real problem that blizz gave us a half assed expansion and not scape goat lfr.

[Nobleshield]

I'm going to have to agree with you on all points here.

Content within an expansion shouldn't be made irrelevant when the next content patch comes. For all its "flaws" TBC had it right, people were on all tiers and paths of progression all expansion long. The newly formed guild half way through the expansion started on Kara, and moved on up (usually quicker than the first guilds because of better geared players, catch up mechanics and such), and all guilds in between.

Well the problem with TBC was you had guilds that could never get out of Kara, but I think that was more due to attunements and poaching. You might still have poaching in a tiered raid system w/out attunements, but you have poaching now anyways. The key would be that boss difficulty needs to slowly ramp up; early bosses in the first raid tier need to be fairly easy (like around as hard as heroic dungeon bosses) to give regular guilds a small handful of bosses to get on farm and work towards more without feeling worthless if, say, the first boss is a roadblock. Also, multiple raids per tier would be great.

[Allenseiei]

LFR took next to no effort to add back in DS/MoP. It equated to equation changes and recoloring gear. Now, Blizzard's putting more time into LFR by removing mechanics (that really didn't need to be removed) and making an entirely different set of gear but other content is suffering as a result. Blizzard ends up having to reuse the LFR armor models for open world gear (the various tokens share the LFR look except the 655 ones as does honor gear) just so they can save on other areas.

Ultimately, the old LFR model (DS/MoP) was more cost effective because Blizzard didn't have to waste time on creating two sets of gear. They could just recolor and change equations. But people bitching about LFR having the same gear (albeit crapper) resulted in it being changed which required MORE effort from Blizzard and resulted in less time for other things.

Mythic raid gear is similar although only a few pieces are different from normal/heroic, not an entire set. Mythic bosses having unique phases or just abilities also result in more time spent that could have been spent elsewhere.

Blizzard's putting too much into raids and should just go back to the DS/MoP model. Then they'd have more time to make other content and not do half assed content (if there's any at all). While the art department doesn't do quests, etc, I'd much rather go back to when PvP and PvE gear had different looks instead of being recolors of each other. But hey, that was the TBC model and TBC was the best, right?

In regards to difficulty, I play a number of games with various difficulty settings. I always start with the easy setting. If I enjoy the game, I replay it on a higher difficulty. If Blizzard made enjoyable raids, then people might be more inclined to follow the carrot up the difficulty ladder, but also having gatekeeper players who kick or reject people for the stupidest things don't help people with people staying in lower difficulties (i.e. LFR). Changing LFR to shitty looking gear and removing REAL tier from it hasn't been enough of a carrot to get people to move up. Gatekeeper players kicking LFR players and/or constantly moving the goal posts so even those with fully upgraded baleful/Kazzak gear have a hard time getting into groups doesn't help.

1. The maximum difficulty of raiding has always had different unique phases and abilities, ever since multiple difficulties were introduced in WotLK.
2. Raiding is the only thing this game has running for itself. It's the only aspect of it which makes it superior to competitors. It's suicide to cut development in raiding.
WoW's current playerbase is only this big because WoW is a safe bet when you want a big community playing a game. It's something that reintroduces more players on its own.
Define "enjoyable" raids.
Most of the things people hate about raiding come from the community, not blizzard's features.


Edit: Adding or taking away difficulties in a raid doesn't take or give almost any resources to anything. Raiding starts in Heroic difficulty and then gets tuned down to normal/LFR or up toward Mythic. Watcher already talked about about this.

[Jaylock]

Well the problem with TBC was you had guilds that could never get out of Kara, but I think that was more due to attunements and poaching. You might still have poaching in a tiered raid system w/out attunements, but you have poaching now anyways. The key would be that boss difficulty needs to slowly ramp up; early bosses in the first raid tier need to be fairly easy (like around as hard as heroic dungeon bosses) to give regular guilds a small handful of bosses to get on farm and work towards more without feeling worthless if, say, the first boss is a roadblock. Also, multiple raids per tier would be great.

I agree with you that the first tier difficulty should ramp up in difficulty, but I dont think they should be pushovers either. Sure, maybe the first 1-2 bosses can be tank/spank esque, but past that, there should be some mechanics that challenge the groups coordination, even if just a little (stay out of fire, dodge rolling fire bolder, group up for a split dmg mechanic, etc). The damage shouldn't be too punishing unless a serious f-up happens. But yeah, I think Karazhan was kind of a perfect ramp up in difficulty.

[Nexii]

I agree with you that the first tier difficulty should ramp up in difficulty, but I dont think they should be pushovers either. Sure, maybe the first 1-2 bosses can be tank/spank esque, but past that, there should be some mechanics that challenge the groups coordination, even if just a little (stay out of fire, dodge rolling fire bolder, group up for a split dmg mechanic, etc). The damage shouldn't be too punishing unless a serious f-up happens. But yeah, I think Karazhan was kind of a perfect ramp up in difficulty.

Yes, I don't know why they deviated from Karazhan really. It was the most popular raid among players that's ever been created. There's a reason for this. It had good atmosphere, and a ramp up in difficulty.

I'd much rather see a single difficulty, with some ilvl overlap between tiers.
T1 800-820
T2 810-830
T3 820-840
...

This sort of thing. It would encourage going back to work on previous tiers, but it wouldn't be required either. Since the late bosses in each tier would be quite difficult, it'd be better to do the current tier at least for the first few bosses. That would also be a small catchup mechanic.

[Allenseiei]

Yes, I don't know why they deviated from Karazhan really. It was the most popular raid among players that's ever been created. There's a reason for this. It had good atmosphere, and a ramp up in difficulty.

I'd much rather see a single difficulty, with some ilvl overlap between tiers.
T1 800-820
T2 810-830
T3 820-840
...

This sort of thing. It would encourage going back to work on previous tiers, but it wouldn't be required either. Since the late bosses in each tier would be quite difficult, it'd be better to do the current tier at least for the first few bosses. That would also be a small catchup mechanic.

It doesn't encourage it forces you. You are also making those first bosses on each tier completely useless. What you are doing is discouraging from people doing the first bosses, making them bland and unattractive. What's going to happen is that the moment you can skip those first bosses, people will skip them.

It doesn't matter if the last bosses of each tier are "difficult", the moment you kill a boss 2-3 times it's no longer challenging. I'm sure your suggestion was with the mentality that tiers don't get nerfed by 30% when the next raid comes out, or else my point would be even more obvious.

[Nobleshield]

It doesn't encourage it forces you. You are also making those first bosses on each tier completely useless. What you are doing is discouraging from people doing the first bosses, making them bland and unattractive. What's going to happen is that the moment you can skip those first bosses, people will skip them.

It doesn't matter if the last bosses of each tier are "difficult", the moment you kill a boss 2-3 times it's no longer challenging. I'm sure your suggestion was with the mentality that tiers don't get nerfed by 30% when the next raid comes out, or else my point would be even more obvious.

The idea is the first bosses provide the bone. An average guild, for example, might be working on boss 5 of a hypothetical 9 boss raid when the next raid comes out; the first boss of that raid is about as hard as the 3rd boss of the initial raid, so the guild can work on that boss as well as try to finish their current raid. The idea is to make multiple tiers viable so you aren't funneling everyone into the same raid at a different difficulty, and also that you provide a ramp-up so you can dabble in Raid 2 while still working on Raid 1.

But yes, it basically sounds like we are talking about TBC-style progression minus attunements.

[Glorious Leader]

Raiding doesn't have to invalidate everything else, the problem is that WoW as a game is built around raiding, and worse it's built around the idea that the current tier of raiding is all that matters. There can/should be alternate ways of gearing (likely take you longer, but still) to cater to everybody: The solo player who wants to go and kill the dragon alone like Conan, the tiny group (e.g. a couple who plays together, or a group of 3 friends), the small group (e.g. 5 people), and the guild who wants to run events together (10+). The content should scale to accommodate all of those people and at the same time allow for different levels of progress without it being all or nothing like it currently is. The problem now is there's no reason really to go back to an older raid tier within the same expansion, and as a result anyone doing so is labelled as a "scrub guild" or similar derogatory language. That's the problem. it should be okay to still be working on Blackrock Foundry, maybe dabbling in a boss or two in HFC.

As long as raiding had a monopoly on end game gearing it will at one point or another invalidate prior content. Concentrating all the character progression inside raiding effectively destroys any activity outside of raiding. The solution is simple. Award the same gear outside the raid.

[Allenseiei]

The idea is the first bosses provide the bone. An average guild, for example, might be working on boss 5 of a hypothetical 9 boss raid when the next raid comes out; the first boss of that raid is about as hard as the 3rd boss of the initial raid, so the guild can work on that boss as well as try to finish their current raid. The idea is to make multiple tiers viable so you aren't funneling everyone into the same raid at a different difficulty, and also that you provide a ramp-up so you can dabble in Raid 2 while still working on Raid 1.

But yes, it basically sounds like we are talking about TBC-style progression minus attunements.

The problem with that is as I stated, you invalidate those bosses later on with the ilvl. You can do the same thing without locking the ilvl to be inferior to the previous raid.
In fact, this is already done. In HFC, the first bosses are easier than their end bosses previous difficulty, but blizzard didn't invalidate them with lower ilevel. That's why many Normal and Heroic guilds have recuiting messages such as: Normal 10/13 and Heroic 4/13 or Heroic 12/13 Mythic 4/13. This is of course done in between the current raid and not spread through the 3 raids, but you can easily bring it to TBC model.

[Jaylock]

The solution is simple. Award the same gear outside the raid.

Nope.

Casuals should not be the ones to dictate what type of gear they receive for the kind of effort they put in. One should be rewarded MORE if they do something MORE difficult. See the common word? MORE? If someone does something LESS difficult, they should be rewarded LESS than those doing more difficult content.

Simple concept that the casual crowd seems to either not understand, or wont understand.

[Riistov]

It's one of the most idiotic hardcore talking points that players are inspired by content that they end up excluded from. No children, that is not how it works.

People just need to look at Wildstar as a case study of what happens when you design content for the 1%. The game literally had everything people like Jaylock want in an MMO, no dungeon/raid finder, attunements, focus on the hardcore raiding community, no flying, and no multiple difficulties. It was going to be an MMO going back to the roots. A fist pump in the air shout-out to the glory days of raiding. With a development team that had worked on vanilla WoW and Everquest, THIS was the game the hard core community was waiting for! So what happened?

It failed spectacularly.

As it turns out, the amount of people who wanted a game stripped of every single quality of life change that's been made over the past 10 years in the genre is not enough to support a healthy raiding community, not even close. Every single raiding guild in Wildstar fell victim to the roster boss, until finally they did away with 40 man raiding entirely and took the game f2p. At this point it's starting to stabilize, but only after the devs started focusing on making content more accessible to everyone. They even added LFD!

[Tomana]

As it turns out, the amount of people who wanted a game stripped of every single quality of life change that's been made over the past 10 years in the genre is not enough to support a healthy raiding community, not even close.

It's one of those things that is basic maths but that everyone seems to ignore, indeed. If you design a game for a niche audience, you better be damn sure that your development costs match the size of the said audience. EvE online was designed to appeal to a small crowd, but they managed to get by with less manpower (because modelling ships costs a lot less than modelling people, among other things). And even then, the company is struggling atm.

So, when you release a wannabe AAA MMO while removing all convenience and feeding the customers the old "journey > result" bullcrap, expect to be smacked around a bit.

[Glorious Leader]

Nope.

Casuals should not be the ones to dictate what type of gear they receive for the kind of effort they put in. One should be rewarded MORE if they do something MORE difficult. See the common word? MORE? If someone does something LESS difficult, they should be rewarded LESS than those doing more difficult content.

Simple concept that the casual crowd seems to either not understand, or wont understand.

Then you can and should continue to expect raid content to always invalidate every other form of content. So long as it retains the monopoly on gear that it does. If anything challenges is you can expect participation to decline as well.