Icecrown Citadel Zone Buff, Blue posts

[Falling]

Really, cloth isn't the issue, since cloth wearers have spells to buff their mitigation. Leather wearers are the ones who end up the most fragile. Mail would be bad too except that shaman can use shields when needed and hunters typically don't get hit by melee much. We just want to bring things a little closer to each other. It's easier to establish a baseline for how hard a particular attack should hit for when one dps spec isn't literally four times as survivable as another.

So this means that enhancement shamans will still be fragile in Cataclysm, woho..............

[Zokten]

yes sir you are absolutely correct we should go back to encounters that are unclearable until 40 people have X level of Y resistance

or are unclearable due to major bugs

or are unclearable due to poor game mechanics

You're an idiot./

Pot + Kettle.

[Morbash]

The incentive is called challenge, something that people have been crying about since WotLK came out.

Yeah, I'm fine with the buff. And I also agree with the whole "just turn it off if you want a challange". However, I do think some sort of incentive IS in order to raid without the buff. Don't get me wrong , I'm in a fairly average 10man guild who only doing Putricide so I'm not concerned about my own personal epeen or anything. But I don't mind the "hard-core" guilds getting some cool stuff. These guys spend ALOT of time mastering this game and are WAY WAY more skilled than the average player. I don't think theres anything wrong with them flexing their epeen a bit, they deserve to. Give them a cookie why don't ya Blizz. At least remove the buff from the hard modes...geez they are supposed to be ...well...hard aren't they?

[Whai]

Hehe, DLC made it once again .

[jenseits]

These guys spend ALOT of time mastering this game and are WAY WAY more skilled than the average player.

Well you're half right

[Ryuko]

You're right, but it still makes no sense playing without the buff... you could just as well say let's play without our normal buffs, it makes the fight harder.

Well it's pretty simple, bosses in ICC were balanced by using all normal class buffs etc.
So making a fight harder but not using any class buffs or using a tank etc. is not really balanced and can't really be considered "a higher challenge".
But this zone buff is a straight up less challenge on the content that has already been balanced, so people that don't want to make it slightly easier, can just turn off the buff.

You will know for a fact that all bosses can be killed without the zone buffs, but you can't really be sure you can kill all bosses without using a tank.

Even though I'm in a casual guild that haven't even killed LK in normal mode, I think 30% would be too much for Heroic ICC at least. In normal ICC it's just fine, but they should had made max 10% buff in Heroic ICC10/25.

[Qprahwndfury]

Still waiting to see what Garrosh has to say. Anyone help us out?

[djsjr]

Cool buff for ferals.

[Gilian]

I remember when they nerfed all bosses+trash in TBC with 30% less health. It was a joke. Our guild sucked but with 30% less health we killed up to KJ making tons of mistakes. Steamrolled black temple. AoEing trash like everyone does now in WotLK.

You know how much a difference 5% more damage is on a fight like saurfang, festergut or blood queen?
I hope this doesn't affect hardmodes only normal. And i hope my guild is done in ICC before we get to 30% buff so i can take a break till cata.

"If you don't like it then remove the buff QQQQQQQQ". If you don't like not killing the end boss then why didn't you quit in TBC?

[Kangodo]

Even though I'm in a casual guild that haven't even killed LK in normal mode, I think 30% would be too much for Heroic ICC at least. In normal ICC it's just fine, but they should had made max 10% buff in Heroic ICC10/25.

Who says this will be for HC too?
I think this buff will only work for ICC normal in order to let everybody see Arthas.

Remember that we are closing a big pile of lore with this expansion, you can't deny it too all those people just because of some QQ from people.

[Hanno]

If you don't like not killing the end boss then why didn't you quit in TBC?

When you use a double negative in a sentence it can be a little confusing for people to understand. Here you have actually used a triple negative, lol. I have no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean. Two negatives equal a positive so I'm guessing if you "don't not like" something then you like it or?

[stupid11]

This REALLY needs to not affect Hard Modes.

Who cares about Normal Modes, weren't they designed for the casual to see them? I thought there was still supposed to be a challenge in this game in the form of Heroic Mode encounters. When did that change?

[Foxhoundn]

JESUS CHRIST WHY ARE YOU SO DUMB if you dont want the buff just _TURN_IT_GOD_DAMNED_OFF_ and stop this QQ waterfalls of tears.

[Simisa]

5 % More Heal Buff = Discipline Priest nerf : /

[Lichiz]

Wrath of the Noob King......

A buff that provides a fucking 5% increased damage, that's just sick
Maybe Blizzards Motives are that everyone shoudl experience the fall of the Lich King..

[Supercool]

When you use a double negative in a sentence it can be a little confusing for people to understand. Here you have actually used a triple negative, lol. I have no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean. Two negatives equal a positive so I'm guessing if you "don't not like" something then you like it or?

No, in that particular sentence, the negatives do not "cancel out." Double negatives can be appropriate sometimes. The sentence could still be rephrased slightly to make it a little more clear. For example:

"If you don't like not being able to kill the end boss, then why didn't you quit in TBC?"

[Jinks]

[Ryuko]

Who says this will be for HC too?
I think this buff will only work for ICC normal in order to let everybody see Arthas.

Remember that we are closing a big pile of lore with this expansion, you can't deny it too all those people just because of some QQ from people.

Because it does, look at Paragon. They killed Heroic LK in 10-man with the buff.

[gringo]

The MMO Report is pure WIN.. again.

Kia Ora!

[Gilian]

No, in that particular sentence, the negatives do not "cancel out." Double negatives can be appropriate sometimes. The sentence could still be rephrased slightly to make it a little more clear. For example:

"If you don't like not being able to kill the end boss, then why didn't you quit in TBC?"

Indeed. Sorry, english is not my native language.

When you use a double negative in a sentence it can be a little confusing for people to understand. Here you have actually used a triple negative, lol. I have no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean. Two negatives equal a positive so I'm guessing if you "don't not like" something then you like it or?

It's actually pretty easy to understand if you try to think. Or do i underestimate the stupidity of the mmo-champion community?
You were actually wrong as the poster in my previous quote explains. So it is not my fault you don't understand a pretty simple sentence.