Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyIommi View Post
    hey man. It's all optional right.... 10/25s, dailies. IT'S ALL OPTIONAL. You can play less who cares? But no we can't get 10/25 back because you can't control yourself instead we get dailies shoved down our fucking faces and told it's totally optional. What if I want to put the time into doing 2 raids? How come that isn't acceptable?
    Nothing is shoved down you throat. It IS optional. Just having the dailies there doesn't mean you have to do them. Not in the slightest. If you think them being available means you MUST do them, its probably because you are OCD and neurotic.

    I also assume this is about the "bonus rolls" from charms. Again, optional. You can get loot without them, but if you want bonus rolls, do the work. You can do 7 dailies a day for a week, and have enough to get the 3 bonus rolls.
    When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.

  2. #42
    High Overlord Bawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    PA
    Posts
    198
    Quote Originally Posted by Rorcanna View Post
    Oh, and I really hope that seperate 10-man and 25-man lockouts NEVER return. NOTHING was as much fun as feeling that you were raiding the inferior content due to the gear difference and drops difference and meta differences.
    Unfortunately it is really the only way to promote more 25m raids. Plus, it was way more fun doing 25m and then doing a 10m later in the week in Wrath. :P

  3. #43
    Wow, so 10man and 25man raiders in Korea both agree that they should reward 25s with 8 extra ilvls? C'mon GC, is your PR on skiing vacation or something?

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    Nothing is shoved down you throat. It IS optional. Just having the dailies there doesn't mean you have to do them. Not in the slightest. If you think them being available means you MUST do them, its probably because you are OCD and neurotic.

    I also assume this is about the "bonus rolls" from charms. Again, optional. You can get loot without them, but if you want bonus rolls, do the work. You can do 7 dailies a day for a week, and have enough to get the 3 bonus rolls.
    Fantastic. I mean I don't agree but you people seem hellbent to stick to the literal and strict meanings of the words "forced" and "optional" so theirs no reasoning with you on that front. But let's say I agree with your premise (which I don't). So why can't I have 10 and 25s on a seperate lock out then? Why did it have to be changed? Why do some people feel forced to have to do 2 raids but then feel perfectly alright in telling others hey man dailies are totally optional? Why is one type of content more or less forced than the others? For that matter why isn't LFR a part of this discussion? PEople feel forced to do lfr, why isn't lfr a shared lockout with regular raids? Or is LFR totally optional to? If lfr is totally optional then I would submit the change to single 10/25 lockout is no longer needed because we now operate in this whole hey man it's optional paradigm.

    So many fucking contradictions so little time.
    Last edited by Leonard McCoy; 2012-12-12 at 02:42 PM.

  5. #45
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Silvermoon City
    Posts
    3,659
    "Going back to the old model where you have to progress linear through the raids from release of current expac?
    That's the plan. We have older Raid Finder tiers now to provide the necessary gear."

    Now that has some serious backfiring potential...

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyIommi View Post
    Fantastic. I mean I don't agree but you people seem hellbent to stick to the literal and strict meanings of the words "forced" and "optional" so theirs no reasoning with you on that front. But let's say I agree with your premise (which I don't). So why can't I have 10 and 25s on a seperate lock out then? Why did it have to be changed? Why do some people feel forced to have to do 2 raids but then feel perfectly alright in telling others hey man dailies are totally optional? Why is one type of content more or less forced than the others? For that matter why isn't LFR a part of this discussion? PEople feel forced to do lfr, why isn't lfr a shared lockout with regular raids? Or is LFR totally optional to? If lfr is totally optional then I would submit the change to single 10/25 lockout is no longer needed because we now operate in this whole hey man it's optional paradigm.
    Yes, we are communicating through text, so I will take things you type out literally.

    You also assume way too much. I have not voiced an opinion about the 10/25 sharing/not sharing lockouts issue. So I don't see where your "contradiction" comment is coming from. My post was ONLY about people whining about dailies.

    I also believe 10/25 man lock outs and dailies are two WAAAAAAAY different issues, and comparing the two to prove a point is both reaching and a straw man argument. I'm not sure how I feel about the lockout issue, so I won't comment.

    Whether 10/25 mans share lockouts, they are both optional. Dailies are optional. Charms are optional. It made me cringe when whiners would say "omg these dailies r so long, i hav to kil 12 mogu omg omg omg" ... Seriously? Then don't do them...

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-12 at 09:51 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomana View Post
    "Going back to the old model where you have to progress linear through the raids from release of current expac?
    That's the plan. We have older Raid Finder tiers now to provide the necessary gear."

    Now that has some serious backfiring potential...
    I agree, but cata was a horrible example of the how the opposing design was crap. My main got into DS normals the old way, doing all the heroics asap, then raids etc.....

    Then End Time, Hour of Twilight, and Well of Eternity come out... uhhh you can level to 85, hold some BOE loot, get carried in those new heroics and BOOM you caught up to your first toon within days. Me and a buddy cracked out, leveled toons from 1-85, grabbed some BOE's and were almost as geared as our mains in THREE DAYS. THAT is ridiculous.
    Last edited by Lemonpartyfan; 2012-12-12 at 02:52 PM.
    When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    Yes, we are communicating through text, so I will take things you type out literally.

    You also assume way too much. I have not voiced an opinion about the 10/25 sharing/not sharing lockouts issue. So I don't see where your "contradiction" comment is coming from. My post was ONLY about people whining about dailies.

    I also believe 10/25 man lock outs and dailies are two WAAAAAAAY different issues, and comparing the two to prove a point is both reaching and a straw man argument. I'm not sure how I feel about the lockout issue, so I won't comment.

    Whether 10/25 mans share lockouts, they are both optional. Dailies are optional. Charms are optional. It made me cringe when whiners would say "omg these dailies r so long, i hav to kil 12 mogu omg omg omg" ... Seriously? Then don't do them...[COLOR="red"]
    The issue isn't either the dailies or the raids. The developers steadfastly refuse to change this even given their new mentality. They are one and the same at it's core. If the developers are serious about investing time in the game as a means for reward, if they are serious about the mentality that you should be rewarded for the time you invest in the game then I see no reason why the lockouts need to be shared.

    The contradiction isn't you. The contradiction is the developers. It's not a fucking strawman to compare them because at it's core the issue isn't the type of content, it's the developer mentality that is massively contradictory. They've done nothing but remove barriers to entry over the years, they've done nothing but make the game progressively more and more friendly for players. Now come to find apparently they have a total mind reversal about these things but can't see the total contradiction in leaving raid lock outs as they are.

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-12 at 02:59 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    I agree, but cata was a horrible example of the how the opposing design was crap. My main got into DS normals the old way, doing all the heroics asap, then raids etc.....

    Then End Time, Hour of Twilight, and Well of Eternity come out... uhhh you can level to 85, hold some BOE loot, get carried in those new heroics and BOOM you caught up to your first toon within days. Me and a buddy cracked out, leveled toons from 1-85, grabbed some BOE's and were almost as geared as our mains in THREE DAYS. THAT is ridiculous.

    You and your buddy may have no fucking lives but that's your prerogative. Remember it was your choice to "crack out your tunes" in 3 days. So where does that leave me and my friends who'd rather have a fun and relatively painless gearing experience? Unsubbed. The only thing ridiculous is that people abused it so badly that Blizzard decided they must make the game less rewarding on a daily basis so people like you can't burn through everything in a day or two.

    Also I would point out that comparing the end of the expansions cycle to the start of a new one is a really bad comparison. Were you geared out in 3 days at the start of cata? I doubt it.
    Last edited by Leonard McCoy; 2012-12-12 at 03:20 PM.

  8. #48
    Sorry if this is a really noobish question. But does this mean that you can do for example Terrace LFR three times a week and spend a charm on the Sha evert single time?

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyIommi View Post
    The issue isn't either the dailies or the raids. The developers steadfastly refuse to change this even given their new mentality. They are one and the same at it's core. If the developers are serious about investing time in the game as a means for reward, if they are serious about the mentality that you should be rewarded for the time you invest in the game then I see no reason why the lockouts need to be shared.

    The contradiction isn't you. The contradiction is the developers. It's not a fucking strawman to compare them because at it's core the issue isn't the type of content, it's the developer mentality that is massively contradictory. They've done nothing but remove barriers to entry over the years, they've done nothing but make the game progressively more and more friendly for players. Now come to find apparently they have a total mind reversal about these things but can't see the total contradiction in leaving raid lock outs as they are.

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-12 at 02:59 PM ----------




    You and your buddy may have no fucking lives but that's your prerogative. Remember it was your choice to "crack out your tunes" in 3 days. So where does that leave me and my friends who'd rather have a fun and relatively painless gearing experience? Unsubbed. The only thing ridiculous is that people abused it so badly that Blizzard decided they must make the game less rewarding on a daily basis so people like you can't burn through everything in a day or two.
    Again, you assume way too much. All it does is make you look stupid, and crap all over any points you may make. It was my prerogative to hang out at my buddies place over a long holiday weekend, buy lots of beer and pizza, and level some toons. Anyone could have done that. Buts its ridiculous that it was THAT streamlined. The SHORTEST and EASIEST part of that process was going from 85 in greens to 85 in mostly purples from the HoT "heroics." Its really not abuse when it was made that way by whining casuals. If you want to unsub because you actually have to spend time leveling and getting gear and generally learning your toons, great. It sucks seeing people in random dungeons that can barely play anyway.

    Again, its a strawman. The comparison is totally ridiculous, and is reaching way too far. Dailies+Charms have almost nothing in common with 10/25 lockouts. Either way, its a crappy argument. It IS optional to do dailies. You can get purples without them. It IS optional to EARN charms. You can get purples without them. raiding 10's or 25's IS optional, regardless of having a lockout.

    In my opinion there should be a standard amount of maximum players per raid. I liked how Kara needed 10 as a starter raid, and the rest were 25's. Something like this should be implemented. That was off topic but I thought it should be mentioned. Again, just because you think their attitude between these two separate issues, does not mean you can argue them against each other.
    When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by TonyIommi View Post
    The issue isn't either the dailies or the raids. The developers steadfastly refuse to change this even given their new mentality. They are one and the same at it's core. If the developers are serious about investing time in the game as a means for reward, if they are serious about the mentality that you should be rewarded for the time you invest in the game then I see no reason why the lockouts need to be shared.
    The main issue with raid lockouts is the loot. It has little to do with invested time, or how much Blizzard thinks you should be playing the game or any of that. Shared lockouts were pretty much required as soon as they made 10s and 25s share a loot table. Otherwise, people would gear up faster than Blizzard wants, because you would get multiple chances (with the coin system up to 4) at a given boss's loot table per week. Any adjustments on the drop rates of loot to compensate for this would increase the perception that running both formats is a requirement instead of an option.

    Blizzard does have the tech necessary to make a player only eligible for loot from a boss once a week, like in LFR, but how many people would honestly run a raid a second time in another format knowing that they are getting no loot? I would guess not many.

    The most obvious solution would be to go back to 10s dropping inferior loot. This would kill the majority of 10-mans, as players would now feel that it is "required" for them to run 25s, whether they want to or not, just for the sake of character power as happened in Wrath. Kinda like how they think that dailies are required in the same non-literal sense. This would destroy a ton of guilds/raid teams that are established in the 10-man format, which in the US/EU is by far the more popular format. Asia may be different, but I don't have data on that region. If they were going to go that route, it would probably been seen as better to just switch to a 15-man format only. Same painful aftermath, but with more benefits.

    So solve all those issues and we could have a perfect multi-format raid system. The current setup is nothing more than Blizzard choosing, in their mind, the lesser of the evils. They really can only end these issues by choosing a single format, regardless of what the final raid size would be, and only developing for that format.
    All this complaining is simply further proof that Blizzard could send each and every player a real-life wish-granting flying unicorn carrying a solid gold plate of chocolate chip cookies wrapped in hundred dollar bills, and someone would whine that Blizzard sucks for not letting them choose oatmeal raisin.
    Quote Originally Posted by DeadmanWalking View Post
    If your guild demands you slip into an elephants butt and force yourself out in a regurgation then you can't blame Blizzard for supplying the elephant.

  11. #51
    High Overlord Faerwen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Brooklyn, New York
    Posts
    128
    I understand the logistical efforts required behind organizing and maintaining a 25-man raid group are challenging, but I do not understand why 25-man raiders believe they are more entitled to higher level gear. Seeing as to the fact that at this point 10 an 25 are relatively close in difficulty, with the one that is actually more challenging being decided on an encounter by encounter basis, the only people truly effected by the logistics of 25-man raiding are the officers and raid leads that manage them, thus they are the only ones who could make a claim towards unfair reward. To separate lockouts and increase the reward of 25 man raiding would be rewarding 20 people for a perceived difficulty that they themselves do not feel or suffer through, as actual encounter difficulty is too subjective to base rewards off of.

  12. #52
    The Lightbringer
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Silvermoon City
    Posts
    3,659
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    I agree, but cata was a horrible example of the how the opposing design was crap. My main got into DS normals the old way, doing all the heroics asap, then raids etc.....

    Then End Time, Hour of Twilight, and Well of Eternity come out... uhhh you can level to 85, hold some BOE loot, get carried in those new heroics and BOOM you caught up to your first toon within days. Me and a buddy cracked out, leveled toons from 1-85, grabbed some BOE's and were almost as geared as our mains in THREE DAYS. THAT is ridiculous.
    I agree. I prefer the MOP design as well, but if it is like BC, it could seriously backfire if people who start playing in, let's say, 5.3 need to do MSV/HOF/Terrace/whateverthe5.2raidisnamed to be able to jump into Siege of Orgrimmar.

    I think, however, that they will implement a slight catch-up mechanic based on a token that drops every time you kill a boss and which will be used to purchase gear (kinda like badges of justice in LK) so that you're not perma-stuck in old tiers of LFR. But yeah, chance is we won't see 5.3 5-mans dropping epics on par with 5.2 raid level.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Febreeze View Post
    The shared lockout is bullshit, and was having this very same conversation in my guild the other day, and EVERYONE agreed that they wanted a return to separate lockouts.
    That is nice for your guild and your server but not everyone has the skilled server population to handle 25m raiding anymore. On my server there is one guild, the one I'm in, that has cleared all content on normal and has any reasonable progression through heroic modes. Everyone else is struggling with normal HoF. Out of the two 10m groups that the guild fields only one has that progression.

    Moving to 25m raiding would mean lowering our standards, getting worse progression, and all for the sake of 8 ilvl. You would essentially force guilds like mine to play with players that we don't want to play with. It is about choice.

    There has to be a way to let people CHOOSE what content that they want to raid, with who they want to raid with, without being penalized for choosing 10m over 25m due to situations outside of their control.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Tomana View Post
    I agree. I prefer the MOP design as well, but if it is like BC, it could seriously backfire if people who start playing in, let's say, 5.3 need to do MSV/HOF/Terrace/whateverthe5.2raidisnamed to be able to jump into Siege of Orgrimmar.

    I think, however, that they will implement a slight catch-up mechanic based on a token that drops every time you kill a boss and which will be used to purchase gear (kinda like badges of justice in LK) so that you're not perma-stuck in old tiers of LFR. But yeah, chance is we won't see 5.3 5-mans dropping epics on par with 5.2 raid level.
    I agree that the BC style wasn't perfect, btu I would prefer it over the Cata style. I don't think the BC style was as bad as people look back and remember. If you were in a decent guild running multiple teams it really wasn't a problem. If you don't think your guild can handle that, then maybe you should merge into a bigger guild. The highest geared players were doing TK/SSC?Mags while others were doing Gruuls/Kara...

    I just feel like many people want to hit max level on one toon and automatically get max level on all their toons so they won't have to do the work.
    When you call yourself an Indian or a Muslim or a Christian or a European, or anything else, you are being violent. Do you see why it is violent? Because you are separating yourself from the rest of mankind. When you separate yourself by belief, by nationality, by tradition, it breeds violence. So a man who is seeking to understand violence does not belong to any country, to any religion, to any political party or partial system; he is concerned with the total understanding of mankind.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by chaud View Post
    Using multiple charms on the same boss per week in lfr (by repeated q'ing) intended or bug? Same chance every time?
    we're fine with it. You'll eventually run out of charms. Same chance every time.
    It seems a lot of GMs are saying you will only get gold on subsequent uses, and yet GC is saying it's the same chance. While I don't think anyone's been able to test the latter, is there anyone who has actually gotten an item off a second use of a charm on the same boss in LFR? I keep hearing how the usual "you might have won this" window pops up, but people might be mistaking the coin roll for the usual loot window...

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Tumleren View Post
    Yeah because nobody in NA/EU wants that model to return, right?

    What a ridiculous argument. Forums have been flooding with requests to go back to the WotLK style of separating 10 and 25 since Cata was released, but obviously we don't want it enough somehow..?
    And by flood you mean, what 3? I sure as hell don't want it back. I like being able to raid on alts and see the content from another point of view. I don't want to feel forced to raid twice a week to keep up on my main.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Gurbz View Post
    The main issue with raid lockouts is the loot. It has little to do with invested time, or how much Blizzard thinks you should be playing the game or any of that. Shared lockouts were pretty much required as soon as they made 10s and 25s share a loot table. Otherwise, people would gear up faster than Blizzard wants, because you would get multiple chances (with the coin system up to 4) at a given boss's loot table per week. Any adjustments on the drop rates of loot to compensate for this would increase the perception that running both formats is a requirement instead of an option.

    Blizzard does have the tech necessary to make a player only eligible for loot from a boss once a week, like in LFR, but how many people would honestly run a raid a second time in another format knowing that they are getting no loot? I would guess not many.

    The most obvious solution would be to go back to 10s dropping inferior loot. This would kill the majority of 10-mans, as players would now feel that it is "required" for them to run 25s, whether they want to or not, just for the sake of character power as happened in Wrath. Kinda like how they think that dailies are required in the same non-literal sense. This would destroy a ton of guilds/raid teams that are established in the 10-man format, which in the US/EU is by far the more popular format. Asia may be different, but I don't have data on that region. If they were going to go that route, it would probably been seen as better to just switch to a 15-man format only. Same painful aftermath, but with more benefits.

    So solve all those issues and we could have a perfect multi-format raid system. The current setup is nothing more than Blizzard choosing, in their mind, the lesser of the evils. They really can only end these issues by choosing a single format, regardless of what the final raid size would be, and only developing for that format.

    Absurd. Utterly and totally absurd. Why would running both raids be required? Everything is optional NOTHING IS REQUIRED. Why are dailies optional but not raids? LFR is also "optional" and yet it presents precisely the same problem that having two seperate lock outs did.

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-12 at 06:35 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    Again, you assume way too much. All it does is make you look stupid, and crap all over any points you may make. It was my prerogative to hang out at my buddies place over a long holiday weekend, buy lots of beer and pizza, and level some toons. Anyone could have done that. Buts its ridiculous that it was THAT streamlined. The SHORTEST and EASIEST part of that process was going from 85 in greens to 85 in mostly purples from the HoT "heroics." Its really not abuse when it was made that way by whining casuals. If you want to unsub because you actually have to spend time leveling and getting gear and generally learning your toons, great. It sucks seeing people in random dungeons that can barely play anyway.

    Again, its a strawman. The comparison is totally ridiculous, and is reaching way too far. Dailies+Charms have almost nothing in common with 10/25 lockouts. Either way, its a crappy argument. It IS optional to do dailies. You can get purples without them. It IS optional to EARN charms. You can get purples without them. raiding 10's or 25's IS optional, regardless of having a lockout.

    In my opinion there should be a standard amount of maximum players per raid. I liked how Kara needed 10 as a starter raid, and the rest were 25's. Something like this should be implemented. That was off topic but I thought it should be mentioned. Again, just because you think their attitude between these two separate issues, does not mean you can argue them against each other.
    I'm the one with strawman comparison but you can't see the utter absurdity of comparing end tier cata to first tier of any expac really. They are totally and utterly in contradiction and I don't have to use Dailies as the only example. LFR is an even better example. It gives out easy loot and yet it totally "optional". It's a second raid cooldown at the same time. Soooo what is it? Why can they make such distinctions without coming out as obvious and total hypocrites?

    ---------- Post added 2012-12-12 at 06:37 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemonpartyfan View Post
    I agree that the BC style wasn't perfect, btu I would prefer it over the Cata style. I don't think the BC style was as bad as people look back and remember. If you were in a decent guild running multiple teams it really wasn't a problem. If you don't think your guild can handle that, then maybe you should merge into a bigger guild. The highest geared players were doing TK/SSC?Mags while others were doing Gruuls/Kara...

    I just feel like many people want to hit max level on one toon and automatically get max level on all their toons so they won't have to do the work.
    You don't even know what the cata style is. You compared it to the last tier which has historically almost always been an easier catch up tier. Hell the final tier of tbc added the biggest and easiest catch up mechanic this game has had and made gearing so much faster. Stop comparing the end of one tier to the beginning of another.
    Last edited by Leonard McCoy; 2012-12-12 at 06:39 PM.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Magemaer View Post
    So people are supposed to spend money going Horde so you can decide to make Alliance racials viable so they can spend their money again going back to the faction they like. You're a monster. What happened to Blizzard. Monsters.

    THIS ^
    I mean seriously blizzard can't you ALREADY tell from the raid statistics that horde racials are way better than the alliance.
    And if you say you're still not sure , Crunch some numbers , do the math to try & figure this shit out for yourself
    WHY Do you need alliance players to faction change in order for you to be Convinced that Alliance side is in fact lacking ?! WTF...

    Heres an example for you

    ORC UNHOLY DeathKnight VS Human UNHOLY DeathKnight


    ORC

    ORC Axe Specialization: Expertise with Fist Weapons, Axes and Two-Handed Axes increased by 1%.


    Lets see here! The end game weapon that has a socket for Sha-touched gem just HAPPENS to be a two-hand Axe " Shin'ka, Execution of Dominion " - Thats the End game Strength weapon right there and Humans have no choice BUT to use it. IF Only there was a Sword version of that weapon that also had a Sha-touched socket for a legendary gem , Humans could also benefit from their Sword specialization racial.

    Blood Fury: Melee attack power increased by 4514, Spell power increased by 2257, Lasts 15 secs. 2Min CD. | This one doesn't even require an explanation - An Extra FREE PURE DPS Trinket right there for Orcs! Now Bllizard... why don't you remove one of Human's weapon specializations, either Mace or Sword and give us something JUST AS GOOD ?! Hmmm ?!

    Command: Damage dealt by pets increased by 5%. We know how Unholy death knights are dependent on their pets, 5% FREE Extra damage ?! Anyone ?!! What a Human death knight gets in return ? DIPLOMACY!


    Back to what I was talking about earlier , DO you honestly believe that Alliance racials are on par with Hordes ?! COME THE F-CK ON...
    Last edited by merogue; 2012-12-12 at 07:40 PM.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Boos View Post
    Mages are fine Arcane and Frost do fine Dps ....and fire not bad
    no they don't.

    look at WoL

    Quote Originally Posted by lizon View Post
    That is nice for your guild and your server but not everyone has the skilled server population to handle 25m raiding anymore. On my server there is one guild, the one I'm in, that has cleared all content on normal and has any reasonable progression through heroic modes. Everyone else is struggling with normal HoF. Out of the two 10m groups that the guild fields only one has that progression.

    Moving to 25m raiding would mean lowering our standards, getting worse progression, and all for the sake of 8 ilvl. You would essentially force guilds like mine to play with players that we don't want to play with. It is about choice.

    There has to be a way to let people CHOOSE what content that they want to raid, with who they want to raid with, without being penalized for choosing 10m over 25m due to situations outside of their control.
    That's Blizzard's fault for not merging servers or allowing free server transfers for low pop realms.

  20. #60
    Mechagnome khatsoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Barcelona, Spain
    Posts
    606
    Quote Originally Posted by nonamexs View Post
    Will rogues be able to transmog Daggers > One hand Swords? They do share the same animations, so I think it should be allowed...Leaving out one or two classes would be pretty shitty IMO.
    They don't, only special attacks (like if you were using SS with a dagger, it would look like a sword animation) or finnishers as far as I know.
    The default white attack animation for daggers looks more like 'stabbing' and not 'hitting'. Also a Mutilate animation with 2 swords would look weird.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •