Once again Blizzard doesnt make much sense.

[Deleted]

So it's okay to make players feel forced to do dailies and tell them they dont have to do it
But at the same time it's not okay to have seperate raid lockouts because people will feel forced to do them and they dont have to do it.

Logic?

[ihyln]

yet they have lfr not on the same lockout

[Lucetia]

So it's okay to make players feel forced to do dailies and tell them they dont have to do it
But at the same time it's not okay to have seperate raid lockouts because people will feel forced to do them and they dont have to do it.

Logic?

Players were never "forced" to do dailies. People only did it to speed up the gear grind as they knew they wouldn't get drops for awhile. By having seperate raid locks you were basically forced to run 10 and 25 to have double the amount of chances at loot, plus valor.

[Deleted]

Players were never "forced" to do dailies. People only did it to speed up the gear grind as they knew they wouldn't get drops for awhile. By having seperate raid locks you were basically forced to run 10 and 25 to have double the amount of chances at loot, plus valor.

How is it bad then to do seperate 10 or 25 man runs to speed up the gear grind as they know they will not get drops in other format for a while?

[Lucetia]

How is it bad then to do seperate 10 or 25 man runs to speed up the gear grind as they know they will not get drops in other format for a while?

Because by allowing 10/25 man separate lockouts most guilds felt forced to run both to keep their gear up for progression. Which lead to people getting burned out a lot faster and quitting sooner.

Yes, I know the "but lfr is on separate lockout" argument will come up. It is and the difference with it is you guild isn't basically being forced to run with you. You can solo queue and queue up for the bosses you need loot from only (to an extent). So say if you need 1 more tier piece you know you can do X or Y boss for it instead of having to run all the bosses before it and getting burned out.

[Deleted]

Players were never "forced" to do dailies. People only did it to speed up the gear grind as they knew they wouldn't get drops for awhile. By having seperate raid locks you were basically forced to run 10 and 25 to have double the amount of chances at loot, plus valor.

Err.. hows it any different to the current model with LFR replacing 10 mans of WotLK?

[Illuminance]

Players were never "forced" to do dailies. People only did it to speed up the gear grind as they knew they wouldn't get drops for awhile. By having seperate raid locks you were basically forced to run 10 and 25 to have double the amount of chances at loot, plus valor.

So basically what you're saying is: in both cases, players aren't forced to do something, but have strong incentive to do it anyway. It really is the same situation, maybe slightly different levels of incentive.

[Otimus]

Strongly encouraged =/= forced.


That being said, they do make a bit too many stupid decisions like the lockouts geared toward the hardcore, when that's not who they should be focusing on.

[Deleted]

Because by allowing 10/25 man separate lockouts most guilds felt forced to run both to keep their gear up for progression. Which lead to people getting burned out a lot faster and quitting sooner.

Yes, I know the "but lfr is on separate lockout" argument will come up. It is and the difference with it is you guild isn't basically being forced to run with you. You can solo queue and queue up for the bosses you need loot from only (to an extent). So say if you need 1 more tier piece you know you can do X or Y boss for it instead of having to run all the bosses before it and getting burned out.

Except it didnt feel like it was "forced" for my guild, since we had more to do what involves actual raiding. We had more fun doing 10 mans which rewards us better for the time investment than stupid dailies for bonus rolls or whatever.

[Deleted]

Because by allowing 10/25 man separate lockouts most guilds felt forced to run both to keep their gear up for progression. Which lead to people getting burned out a lot faster and quitting sooner.

Yes, I know the "but lfr is on separate lockout" argument will come up. It is and the difference with it is you guild isn't basically being forced to run with you. You can solo queue and queue up for the bosses you need loot from only (to an extent). So say if you need 1 more tier piece you know you can do X or Y boss for it instead of having to run all the bosses before it and getting burned out.

But somehow dailies are not burning out people right?
Same justification we been fed regarding dailies can be applied to the issue you are showing.

"You dont have to do two raid lockouts".
Replace the words "two raid lockouts" with "dailies". Why in such case the "dailies" variation is accepted but "two raid lockouts" is not?

[Mirishka]

I think 10s and 25s should be on separate lockouts again. I think Blizz's logic is sound on the issue - I remember running 4 versions of Trial, it sucked tons - but ultimately, it should be in our hands if we choose to do both.

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 05:31 PM ----------

"You dont have to do two raid lockouts".
Replace the words "two raid lockouts" with "dailies". Why in such case the "dailies" variation is accepted but "two raid lockouts" is not?

Comparing dailies to raids is, well, stupid. Dailies are childishly easy, my warrior can 2-3 global 90% of daily mobs. I can go through the entire GL set of dailies in 20min. That is trivial, absolutely unequivocally trivial, compared to the time and effort of raiding. 9-24 other people, buffs, consumables, watching videos of strats, mobs with hundreds of millions of health, mechanics to learn, etc etc.

You may as well compare Heroic Gate of the Setting sun to Ragefire Chasm.

[Gimlix]

So it's okay to make players feel forced to do dailies and tell them they dont have to do it
But at the same time it's not okay to have seperate raid lockouts because people will feel forced to do them and they dont have to do it.

Logic?

Where has blizzard ever said that people were FORCED to do dailies?
They said from time to time to the haters that they are NOT forced to dailies.

You are putting words in their mouths that they never said.

[Deleted]

Comparing dailies to raids is, well, stupid. Dailies are childishly easy, my warrior can 2-3 global 90% of daily mobs. I can go through the entire GL set of dailies in 20min. That is trivial, absolutely unequivocally trivial, compared to the time and effort of raiding. 9-24 other people, buffs, consumables, hours, mobs with hundreds of millions of health, mechanics to learn, etc etc.

You may as well compare Heroic Gate of the Setting sun to Ragefire Chasm.

There's too much data that lacks in your posts to back up your claim:
- what is your warrior gear level? perhaps not everyone has a well geared warrior as you? it makes a difference
- how good are you with your warrior? perhaps majority of warriors cant global mobs like you do? It makes a difference
- what is your daily routine? perhaps people do much more dailies than you? it makes a difference
- how competent is your guild? Perhaps not all as competent as yours? it makes a difference

There's never a good reason to limit options, if one person should have his winged clipped because the other person will feel bad because he cant do as much as the other one than screw that second guy!

---------- Post added 2013-05-16 at 05:39 PM ----------

Where has blizzard ever said that people were FORCED to do dailies?
They said from time to time to the haters that they are NOT forced to dailies.

You are putting words in their mouths that they never said.

FEEL FORCED.
Please read carefully next time.

Also ib4 you say then never said "dailies feel forced"

https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...43112524218368
You forced me to do what I don't like or even hate: scenarios, dailies, pet battles, brawler guild and etc.
I can understand scenarios and dailies. Why would you do pet battles and brawler's guild if you don't enjoy them?