Holy mother 10man nerf

[Tharkkun]

Horridon was up a bit, but is still lagging 10K guilds behind where Feng was at this time in T14.

The problem is not just Horridon tuning, but the persistent effect of T14 tuning. Many guilds didn't gear out in T14, and appear largely not to be "playing as intended" and sticking there to gear out with the 10% nerf.

I don't think there's much Blizzard can do to fix it at this point. They've pretty much verbed the pooch with this design. I wonder how many mulligans they can call on raid design before people on the dev team start getting replaced.

Garalon was definitely overtuned compared to the rest but other than that Tier 14 has been fairly easy. We started back up in late February and will have Toes cleared on a 5-6 hour raid week. The biggest hurdle is finding people to commit which has no bearing on the difficulty of a tier.

I see so many people want the easy wins now as we cycled through personnel that it's obvious people don't want to try. If it wasn't on farm they had no interest. Difficulty won't alter this attitude as I'm sure they are the same people bitching in LFR.

[Bendeis]

I don't understand why people even did the zerg strat because you do so little damage compared to otherwise. Especially when you are mutated you get 10 buffs that increase your DPS above 100%

5 buffs, the dungeon journal is incorrect.

[Osmeric]

The biggest hurdle is finding people to commit which has no bearing on the difficulty of a tier.

I see so many people want the easy wins now as we cycled through personnel that it's obvious people don't want to try. If it wasn't on farm they had no interest. Difficulty won't alter this attitude as I'm sure they are the same people bitching in LFR.

This is true, but difficulty can't be ignored. The less commitment someone feels, the less they feel the content is "worth it", the less effort they will put in to overcome obstacles. If the player population is becoming less comitted, producing content that demands increasing commitment seems counterproductive. It's the devs pandering to a vision rather than to the reality of who plays their game.

[Femoris]

This is true, but difficulty can't be ignored. The less commitment someone feels, the less they feel the content is "worth it", the less effort they will put in to overcome obstacles. If the player population is becoming less comitted, producing content that demands increasing commitment seems counterproductive. It's the devs pandering to a vision rather than to the reality of who plays their game.

Sometimes setting a vision and holding a standard for something is more important that appealing to the lowest common denominator. It comes down to the question of what does blizzard want the vision for their game to be? Do they want "normal" difficulty to be for above average raiders and heroic for the best of the best while leaving lfr for everybody else or do they want "normal" to be for everybody that "feels" like they deserve it. In the end it is blizzard's game. We can either choose to play it or not. Just because we choose to spend out money on something does not mean that the company has to design it exactly how we want it. We should buy it because we want it how they designed it.

[cabyio]

This is true, but difficulty can't be ignored. The less commitment someone feels, the less they feel the content is "worth it", the less effort they will put in to overcome obstacles. If the player population is becoming less comitted, producing content that demands increasing commitment seems counterproductive. It's the devs pandering to a vision rather than to the reality of who plays their game.

One thing you forget is that while it may have the moniker of "normal". It is also raiding. Raiding has always been a pursuit that required a certain amount of commitment and effort. It was never made for the masses (except LFR, which is still fairly new in the total timeline). Raiding was always made for those that had the skill/commitment and desire to complete such content.

Under your argument if all of a sudden 80% of the wow player-base wanted to raid, should normal raids be dumbed down to the point where tactics are a thing of the past? At some point you have to draw a line in the sand and say, "HERE, and no further."

[Tharkkun]

This is true, but difficulty can't be ignored. The less commitment someone feels, the less they feel the content is "worth it", the less effort they will put in to overcome obstacles. If the player population is becoming less comitted, producing content that demands increasing commitment seems counterproductive. It's the devs pandering to a vision rather than to the reality of who plays their game.

The time commitment in this game has dropped considerably over the years though. When I first raided back in vanilla we raided 5 days a week, 4-5 hours a night so 20-25 a week. In TBC we raided 3 nights a week totaling 11 hours a week. In WOTLK our raid bumped down to 2 nights, 8 hours a week but we added a 10 man for 2-3. Cata bumped down to 8 hours and now in MOP I'm down to 5-6.

So realistically the people are devoting less time to the game. Blizzard has slowly eliminated time sinks and allowed dedicated players to progress in less time. Mass ressing, checkpoints for raids so you don't run through the whole dungeon, extended flasks, easier consumables, raid wide food, etc. All these things to speed things up.

But if you don't have the drive to progress there's not much Blizzard can do. I lost the desire to play Wow for close to a year and when I returned I would like to do heroic raids, but I don't have the desire to as of yet. I'm sure others are in the same boat. At some point you have to say do I play this game for the content or for the challenge of normal/heroic raids.

[Osmeric]

But if you don't have the drive to progress there's not much Blizzard can do.

I'm not talking about time commitment, I'm talking about the psychic commitment to push oneself into harder content. This push is not free; it requires willpower and marshalling of mental resources. It presents a risk to the ego, in the event of failure. This all has a cost over and above the time required.

And of course there is something Blizzard can do: they can make content that doesn't have such a high psychic cost. There is no law of nature forcing Blizzard to make content that caters to a tiny segment of their customers at the expense of the great majority.

[melodramocracy]

This is true, but difficulty can't be ignored. The less commitment someone feels, the less they feel the content is "worth it", the less effort they will put in to overcome obstacles. If the player population is becoming less comitted, producing content that demands increasing commitment seems counterproductive. It's the devs pandering to a vision rather than to the reality of who plays their game.

Or better yet, in the case now with raiding, when people are given separate paths to a goal, they'll generally pick the easiest one. Catering to that from a dev perspective will simply snowball the effect rather than actually solve anything.

For an example outside of raiding, look at how long leveling used to take in this game (chuckle). Complaint after complaint over the course of years, and it has been made far far faster. And that still isn't enough for folks.

[Osmeric]

Or better yet, in the case now with raiding, when people are given separate paths to a goal, they'll generally pick the easiest one. Catering to that from a dev perspective will simply snowball the effect rather than actually solve anything.

But note that they're not getting to the same goal. Normal and heroic raids produce superior gear.

But despite having superior rewards, customers are, by and large, turning their noses up at that and selecting LFR instead. What does it say about content that most customers snub even when you bribe them? It says most customers don't want that content.

This is significant. If people do content that has great rewards, you don't know if it was the reward or the experience they wanted. If people decline content even given rewards, there is no such ambiguity.

[fangless]

Horridon was up a bit, but is still lagging 10K guilds behind where Feng was at this time in T14.

The problem is not just Horridon tuning, but the persistent effect of T14 tuning. Many guilds didn't gear out in T14, and appear largely not to be "playing as intended" and sticking there to gear out with the 10% nerf.

I don't think there's much Blizzard can do to fix it at this point. They've pretty much verbed the pooch with this design. I wonder how many mulligans they can call on raid design before people on the dev team start getting replaced.

But this design was under no scrutiny during Burning Crusade.

It's just the mentality of the community, and if anything I commend Blizzard for at least somewhat sticking to their guns. There's a point where you just give everyone what they want, try to appeal to the masses, and lose sight of your original goal.

In the end though, it's a business. One partially ran by Activision.

[melodramocracy]

But note that they're not getting to the same goal. Normal and heroic raids produce superior gear.

But despite having superior rewards, customers are, by and large, turning their noses up at that and selecting LFR instead. What does it say about content that most customers snub even when you bribe them? It says most customers don't want that content.

This is significant. If people do content that has great rewards, you don't know if it was the reward or the experience they wanted. If people decline content even given rewards, there is no such ambiguity.

I think that most players want the experience of any game aspect at least once. Subsequent visits are generally reward-driven, and MMO's rely on a certain level of player repetition by their nature.

It would seem that the LFR time investment (and effort?) advantages trump the inferior, yet still 'sufficient' rewards.

[Deleted]

There's actually some people that think dumbing down normals to around LFR level would be bad ?

Thank god, now i'm a believer.

[Osmeric]

There's actually some people that think dumbing down normals to around LFR level would be bad ?

Even I am not saying that would be a good idea. There is a huge gap between current normal mode tuning and current LFR tuning.

[Deleted]

Even I am not saying that would be a good idea. There is a huge gap between current normal mode tuning and current LFR tuning.

What LFR brought is frustration when you have bad luck streaks and no sense of reward whatsoever when you kill a boss. When something is too easy, it's not fun, and it dumbs down people and makes them to just enough effort to achieve the goal.
Half the people don't know what the boss does, they come with no enchants, and no gems and bizarre specs.

LFR what a good idea, and i'm happy for those who have fun in LFRs and are now able to see the content without having to raid multiples times a week and work on it.
But it also brought its load of whiner, leechers, and slackers. Things you very rarely seen in Heroic Dungeons and NM Raids. (before)

[Tricksterjim]

LFR Is for people who want to "experience" the content. You still have a chance to gear up.
Normal is for organized groups who want some sort of challenge and reward
Heroic is for those who want a substantial challenge and reward.

If you can't down a boss in ToT on normal with your group. Go back to the last Tier and steam roll it and get some more gear, go do some dailies and get gear, do LFR and get some gear etc. If you continue to wipe, assess who is failing in the group and either encourage them to actually learn how to play and do a modicum of research or replace them.

I am ok with nerfs if there is actually a need. After more and more reading on these, it just seems like it is pandering to the groups that have members that can't figure out how to not stand in fire or how to dispel or how to use defensive CDs.All of which are basic to any raiding group and it is a disservice to the group. Or to those groups that want to completely skip previous content and do the highest level raid. Then again, they are just going to get to Toros and Magaera and need more nerfs for those fights as well.

[cabyio]

I'm not talking about time commitment, I'm talking about the psychic commitment to push oneself into harder content. This push is not free; it requires willpower and marshalling of mental resources. It presents a risk to the ego, in the event of failure. This all has a cost over and above the time required.

And of course there is something Blizzard can do: they can make content that doesn't have such a high psychic cost. There is no law of nature forcing Blizzard to make content that caters to a tiny segment of their customers at the expense of the great majority.

If you can't marshal the mental resources to overcome simple encounters in a game then I feel really sorry for you in the real world.

Infracted; Do not make personal attacks against someone. Comment on post, not on the poster. (Sonnillon)

[Osmeric]

If you can't marshal the mental resources to overcome simple encounters in a game then I feel really sorry for you in the real world.

I love it when someone slips into ad hominem mode. It's like they're waving a white flag in a debate.

But anyway, Ego Depletion is a real phenomenon. Maybe the people who save their mental resources for real life are the ones to be lauded?

Warning; Stay on topic! If you have something off-topic to discuss with someone, please do so via PMs. (Sonnillon)

[cabyio]

I love it when someone slips into ad hominem mode. It's like they're waving a white flag in a debate.

But anyway, Ego Depletion is a real phenomenon. Maybe the people who save their mental resources for real life are the ones to be lauded?

I do see your point with the ad hominem. However, when someone cannot complete a task, there may be an issue with the task, but might there also be an issue with the person? Our world would be a sad place if all tasks were dumbed down so that most people could complete them. Some responsibility has to lay with the player/user. When someone cannot complete a task, why must they assume the task is too hard. The more constructive attitude is to say, "I must try harder then I have in the past to complete this task (i.e. a Challenge)". There is no sense of pride in the completion of a task if that tasks level was brought down to you, rather than you reaching up to meet it.

Also if someone has limited willpower/etc (ego depletion), I do applaud them for using it on real life endeavors rather than a game. However, is it right for that person to then say, "Hey, I dont have enough willpower to complete this task as I have deemed it low priority in the overall scheme, you should simplify it for me!"

[Osmeric]

Also if someone has limited willpower/etc (ego depletion), I do applaud them for using it on real life endeavors rather than a game. However, is it right for that person to then say, "Hey, I dont have enough willpower to complete this task as I have deemed it low priority in the overall scheme, you should simplify it for me!"

It's always proper for a customer to say "design the product to satisfy me sufficiently, or I won't send you money". I mean, how could it be otherwise?

[cabyio]

double post... sorry