
Originally Posted by
Alyssa
And the majority don't raid either so what's you point? In fact it's around 20% of the player base if we are to trust Blizzards statement about DS clears.
You think just because players raid that they go inspect achievement dates? This is a discussion about raid progression, rewards from it and achievements, why do you think non raiders where of any relevance to the discussion in the first place.
---------- Post added 2012-10-06 at 10:46 AM ----------
Which is fine, there is a huge difference between full tier lifespan and the nerf to DS rolleing out after 2 months though, which was the shortest time span of un-nerfed heroics ever, especially considering it was launched a few weeks before Christmas which removed a couple of weeks of proper raiding.
Linear raiding in BC didn't have this issue as the nerfs didn't come until new content was out.
So why is it ok that others dont' have to invest time/effort and skill in to it if the once seeking a challenge have to, we where at 6/8 hc in the 6 weeks we got to raid DS before the nerfs with 2 days a week, how could it possibly be considered ok that we got deprived of our content at that point with 7 months more to go of the tier.
Well if it's ok to remove the heroic content through nerfs then logically it must be equally ok to remove the bottom end of the spectrum no?
Which they are due to the huge i-lvl inflation we get due to it not being linear raiding, as I said it compounds the issue more than it already is.
That's only an issue because Blizzard has held their hand to the point where they expect to down content that is out of their league in the first place, this instead of creating more content aimed for them in the first place. It's an entitlement issue nothing more, besides the system we have now is hemorrhaging players on the other end of the spectrum instead.
Sure but that's the issue with the system the way it is now, while some will buy their way through accounts or boosts that's a minor issue overall, not to mention much more viable for high end guilds if they dont' feel the rewards hold any real value, mostly you would be able to see if a player had good progression at a glance back in the day.
My point was that if lets say for argument sake that 50% is RMP then it is quite obviously the better choice, and while it is the better choice in a general sense it doesn't exclude that some exceptional players can beat all of them with another comp, it does however clearly indicate that composition plays a huge part in if you are successful or not.
Now I'm no expert on WoW PvP nor do I care much about it so take my comments on that for what they are.