Page 1 of 9
1
2
3
... LastLast
  1. #1

    Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Update Added Recent In-Game Fixes. Also, the 31 bosses thing might have just been a bad joke ...
    [blizzquote="Ghostcrawler;http://blue.mmo-champion.com/12/19110156318-31-bosses-in-icecrown-raid.html] I was the person who set the original Kill Yogg achievement to 22 minutes too. Just sayin'. [/blizzquote"]

    Recent In-Game Fixes - 08/10/09
    Originally Posted by Crygil (Blue Tracker)

    • In the Flame Leviathan encounter, the Tower of Life buff will no longer remain active after the Tower of Life has been destroyed.

    Several changes have been made to the Seaforium Bombs and Huge Seaforium Bombs:
    • Seaforium Bombs and Huge Seaforium Bombs will now do less damage to players.
    • Seaforium Bombs and Huge Seaforium Bombs will now do more siege damage.
    • The respawn timer on Seaforium Bombs and Huge Seaforium Bombs have been reduced.
    Icecrown Citadel will have at least 31 Bosses
    This is the quote of the day, in a post about tanking Ghostcrawler hinted at the amount of encounters in Icecrown Citadel, the raid instance of Patch 3.3.
    [blizzquote="Ghostcrawler;http://blue.mmo-champion.com/26/19110293530-33-is-the-age-of-the-warriors.html]I don't know that I would say we want tanking niches. I ultimately am agreeing with what you're saying, but once we say "tanking niches" players have visions of the DK who parks outside of Icecrown until boss 4, 17 and 31 (yes, IC is that big). [/blizzquote"]

    Season 7 might start after another patch
    Apparently, Season 7 won't start before a few balancing issues are adressed, I guess we can expect a minor patch "soon" and arena teams still have a few more weeks to compete in the current season.
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler (Blue Tracker)
    We are going to fix the specific scenario where a PvP paladin with a Prot build but spell power gear can heal for more than a Holy build in the same gear. We want to do this without messing up the Prot paladin trying to tank in PvE.

    We will probably not make this change before the end of the current Arena season, but you can be thinking about your teams for season 7 with this change in mind.
    Blue posts
    Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
    "Tank and Spank" encounters
    We aren't trying to make the fights easy necessarily, but we are trying to challenge the tanks and the raid in ways other than just pounding the tank as hard as we can such that cooldowns (from the healers even) and big heals become the only things that matter. Those are fine for some fights, just as having a tank and spank once in awhile is fine. The problem with Ulduar is that too many of the fights came down to these huge hits such that other parts of tanking (and healing) became pushed to the side. For example, nobody is as worried about being a mana sponge these days because mana isn't generally limiting and tanks can generally be destroyed in two hits. (Source)

    PvE design for Tanking
    Nah. Too many of you are trying to solve the tanking puzzle in one of two ways: find the best class to tank to make things easier for you, or bring one of every tank so that you have the bases covered. Neither of those is our design.

    Our design is that you can pick an MT and 1-3 OTs (depending on the content) and be able to beat the encounters, assuming those players have a reasonable amount of skill and gear. The balance has to be close enough that no matter which class you pick as a tank that you can still make progress. Generally that works out okay because players have beaten the content with all four tanks. There are some situations, especially on hard modes, where choosing one tank makes the encounter much easier than on others. We're okay with it being "easier," but we don't want it to be "much easier" and we don't want it to happen too often or always favor the same class. If we thought we had nailed tank balance we wouldn't still be tweaking numbers and talents.

    For many of you though, learning the encounters, learning to coordinate better or getting better gear will improve your chances far more than picking "the best" tank class. That's not true of every guild, but it is probably true for most of them. (Source)

    Tanking classes homogenization and tanking niches
    We understand that there is a segment of the community that wants to see all tank numbers virtually identical to each other on all fights. We see requests for DKs to block and druids to parry and for every class to have an equivalent snap-aggro move for single target and AE fights, etc. That's just not the direction we want to take the game. We want your group to do things a little differently if you have a bear instead of a paladin tank. We want that if you've played a DK throughout LK to have to learn and adapt to class differences if you choose to reroll a warrior. We want the numbers to be close enough so that a group that runs with tank X doesn't feel at a serious disadvantage on specific fights. But we aren't trying to make everyone the same. (Source)

    [...] I don't know that I would say we want tanking niches. I ultimately am agreeing with what you're saying, but once we say "tanking niches" players have visions of the DK who parks outside of Icecrown until boss 4, 17 and 31 (yes, IC is that big).

    I totally agree that no tank can be the worst at everything. What you have to remember though is that "everything" is generally defined as the current raid content. Coliseum isn't a large raid. If there are 5 bosses and 4 tanks then it seems that even in the best case that someone might be "the best" on 2 of them and everyone else is "the best" on 1. (And honestly, we don't design raid encounters with that goal in mind -- they have enough constraints on them already.)

    Again, the goal is "close enough" and the mushiness of that definition is intended. For some groups, having a tank that is "5% harder to heal" (whatever that means) is acceptable and perhaps not even detectable. We just need to avoid the extreme situation where the guild that feels gimp because their MT is a paladin (or whatever) and paladins have a lot of liabilities on the current raid content to the extent where that player is getting replaced on more than just a couple of fights. (And I should add by knowledgeable raid leadership, and not just the Naxx pug guy that read on the forums that bears are the best tank and so only accepts bears.) (Source)

    Druid
    Wild Growth Bugs
    I was going to post that we fixed this, because we did. But I'm glad that I didn't because sometime during the 3.2 patch it broke again.

    Sometimes when we don't address simple things head on, it's for reasons like this. We'll try to get it fixed (again) as soon as we understand what happened. (Source)

    Mage
    Arcane Mages
    I think mana issues and talent tree bloat are quality of life issues. They are things we need to fix, but players would play Arcane without those changes if the damage was good.

    Raid utility would help, I agree.

    The problem with buffing Arcane's damage is that so many of the changes could be used to get big Arcane Barrage + PoM "something" back to back and 'splode someone in 2 shots again (or maybe 4 shots if you get another Barrage and Fireblast). We need to buff Arcane through other spells that can help sustained but not burst damage. That might mean going to higher stacks of Blast or something, but that could be a PvP nerf. (Source)

    [...] Arcane could have a talent to make all of their Arcane spells 50% cheaper, but if its dps is far behind Fire, you aren't going to see many players choose Arcane except on say fights like Vezax. It might be true if you were purposely avoiding using a high damage, expensive spell in order to conserve mana. Realistically, I don't see that happening.

    Now you can certainly have a model where Arcane did great damage for 2 minutes and then ran out of mana so that sustained damage was low over the course of a 4 minute fight. But that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about mages feeling like Arcane is a legitimate option to Fire, which it was pretty close to in the early days of Lich King. (Source)

    Paladin
    Prot Paladin healing in PvP / Touched by the Light
    We are going to fix the specific scenario where a PvP paladin with a Prot build but spell power gear can heal for more than a Holy build in the same gear. We want to do this without messing up the Prot paladin trying to tank in PvE.

    We will probably not make this change before the end of the current Arena season, but you can be thinking about your teams for season 7 with this change in mind. (Source)

    [...] Touched by the Light helps to solve a specific problem which is that paladins do both physical and magical damage and Prot paladins need both for threat (and damage). It works fine when the paladin is in tanking gear, and in fact was designed so that paladins wouldn't need to mix tanking gear with caster gear as they did in the past.

    It is not balanced for a Prot paladin who decides to wear spell power gear. At that point you're double-dipping.

    We have no problem with Prot paladins in PvP, but they need to be there because their survivability is an asset, not because they can out-heal an entire tree dedicated to healing.

    There is a fine line between creative use of game mechanics and something that goes against our vision for the game. It's always going to be subjective. If the Retribution tree ended up being better at tanking than the Protection tree, or the Shadow priest was a better healer than the Disc tree, or the Marks hunter had a more powerful pet than the BM hunter, we'd take similar action. (Source)

    Balancing Holy and Prot paladins in PvP
    As Affix said, if Prot paladins are impossible to kill because of their healing potential, the answer is not to make Holy paladins even more powerful than that.

    We have no problem if Prot paladins are hard to kill like Prot warriors or bear druids are hard to kill. But I don't think that's really what we're talking about. (Source)
    Something is wrong with the game!
    You might want to read that before you complain about it on official forums (or anywhere else actually).
    Originally Posted by Ghostcrawler (Blue Tracker)
    If there is something you think is wrong with the game that we have't addressed, usually one of the following is true:

    1) We don't think something is wrong. In this case, repeatedly posting the same thing over and over is unlikely to change our minds.

    2) We think something is wrong, but we aren't ready to announce a change yet. This could be because we don't know how we want to fix it yet, we know how we want to fix it but require new tech to implement it, or because the change is going to take awhile.

    In both of these cases, posting the same thing over and over again or bumping a thread when you have no new information to add isn't going to have the effect you're looking for. The goal often seems to be to post over an over either because you're so angry you can't take it anymore, or because you're stubborn and are looking for that blue post that finally says "here's how we're going to buff you." That happens, but it doesn't happen that often, and in those cases it is always because we agree something is a problem, not because you wore us down.

    I know some of you just want a thumb's up or thumb's down answer on a community question or issue, but even that is beyond what we want to do with these forums. We don't have the time nor inclination to respond to every issue, let alone every thread. Furthermore, simple answers are rarely enough for a design-savy community that wants to know why, wants to explore edge-cases or perhaps even wants to see hard proof. Short blue answers rarely "solve" anything and more often throw fuel on a fire.

    Here is how the process should ideally work: If you have an issue, bring it up. See if other players agree with you. If they disagree, don't shut them out. Once you've explored the issue a little bit, you've done your job. You don't need to keep starting new topics on the same issue nor bumping those already so long that no reasonable person is going to read them (though I try to).

    Sometimes we'll respond to a topic and sometimes we won't. But given the realities of developer time and the number of WoW players out there (even the minority of forum-posting ones) you should interpret those responses as almost random and not suggestive of a topic's severity or merit.

  2. #2

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    maybe icecrown will be a real challenge to high guilds..

  3. #3

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    31 bosses, eh? Plenty of room for an undead Kael in there.

  4. #4

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    31 bosses... holy shit on a shit sandwhich with shit on the side.

    Thats alotta fuckin bosses

    I'm sorry for the excessive swearing...

  5. #5

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    i'm really affraid of icecrown raid. with what we had with
    3.0 naxx server cold
    3.1 in the standard,,
    3.2 total awfullness + setback, woohoo
    so yea, expect to be dissapointed
    WoW free since 8/10/09
    well i got stuck homesick with nothing to do pretty much and... for the sixth time, i started playing again.

  6. #6

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by peknoman
    i'm really affraid of icecrown raid. with what we had with
    3.0 naxx server cold
    3.1 in the standard,,
    3.2 total awfullness + setback, woohoo
    so yea, expect to be dissapointed
    Stop being such a downer and be a little bit of a realist. Sure they released an underwhelming patch to keep the playerbase occupied while they're working on Icecrown but I suspect this team has been working on icecrown since the release of WotLK.

    If Icecrown would have been ready by now I bet 3.2 would've included Icecrown and not ToC with a possible smaller instance after it to keep the playerbase occupied until the release of Cataclysm much like what happened with Sunwell in BC.
    If a shaman tells you that he can't tank, he's just not doing it right.

  7. #7

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    sooo, either wotlk has been a complex ploy to keep people playing while they were developing the end all be all raid for another year, or we'll be seeing 31 larger slightly reskinned mobs from Northrend with re-hashed abilities....

    Experience tells me it's not the first option.

  8. #8

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Xombo
    Stop being such a downer and be a little bit of a realist. Sure they released an underwhelming patch to keep the playerbase occupied while they're working on Icecrown but I suspect this team has been working on icecrown since the release of WotLK.

    If Icecrown would have been ready by now I bet 3.2 would've included Icecrown and not ToC with a possible smaller instance after it to keep the playerbase occupied until the release of Cataclysm much like what happened with Sunwell in BC.
    Just like they said they had been working on Ulduar all through WotLK beta, eh?

  9. #9

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Best news I've heard since the shaman changes, 31 bosses in Icecrown, dayumzz.

    also

    FINALLY PROT/HOLY IS GETTING FUCKING FIXED!

  10. #10
    LOAD"*",8,1 Fuzzzie's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Legion of Doom Headquarters
    Posts
    20,245

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    31 bosses? WTF for? What possible loot is going to drop off 31 bosses? 2 pieces off each one?

    If this is the case then Blizz is out of ideas and the next xpac is a long ways away. If they really implement a raid with 31 bosses expect to be raiding it for at least a year.


  11. #11

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Hopes are in for atleast one resi-check cockblock!

  12. #12

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    simple fix to the prot/holy problem for paladins. Make the talent provide spl pwr dmg, not healing, like the druids imp moonkin form does

  13. #13

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Ares42
    Just like they said they had been working on Ulduar all through WotLK beta, eh?
    They almost definitely were. Do you have any idea how long it takes to create new content? Let alone design the bosses and attempt to balance them.

  14. #14

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    31 freaken bosses?! That's insane!

  15. #15

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    nothing special...31 divided by 4 = ~8bosses per difficulty level

  16. #16

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    cool ic is gonna have 31 bosses. when are faction changes dammit lol

  17. #17

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Ares42
    Just like they said they had been working on Ulduar all through WotLK beta, eh?
    I can definitly see them spending alot more time on the Icecrown Citadel than Ulduar. The expension pack is Wrath of the Lich King afterall, and so I would suspect they would put the most time and effort into maing his instance the best of the expansion, kinda like Illidan and the Black Temple was arguably the best expansion of BC.

    Don't get me wrong though, I wouldn't be *entirely* surprised if Icecrown was released with 80% of the bosses being reskins though...
    If a shaman tells you that he can't tank, he's just not doing it right.

  18. #18

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by mbl
    nothing special...31 divided by 4 = ~8bosses per difficulty level
    If a shaman tells you that he can't tank, he's just not doing it right.

  19. #19
    Stood in the Fire NefariousNinja's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    450

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Xombo

    Por que?

  20. #20

    Re: Icecrown Citadel, Season 7, Blue posts

    Quote Originally Posted by Xombo
    He said "approximately".

Posting Permissions

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