SoO Nerfs, infuriating.

[Deleted]

With the nerf on Empowered Weapons HP, anyone soloing them now? or still not doable except on the first assembly line?

Doable just fine with a class that isn't hugely dependent on procs (or any class with some procs).

[Deleted]

With the nerf on Empowered Weapons HP, anyone soloing them now? or still not doable except on the first assembly line?

If you rotate ppl who saved all their cooldowns for the belt than you can do 1 each belt

[Deleted]

With the nerf on Empowered Weapons HP, anyone soloing them now? or still not doable except on the first assembly line?

As a combat rogue im soloing the first one easy, and IF I get lucky with crits and procs I can solo every other belt after that, but its not worth the risk, rather have 2 people and be done half way thrugh than being 200k short on my own.

[Ballantines]

Word hunger, cancer, diseases, pollution, civil wars...he's "infuriated" by siege of orgrimmar nerfs.

[slime]

I don't see why they took out the way nerfs were in ICC, where you could turn them off if you prefer.

[thedingleberry]

If you aren't good enough to kill the bosses pre-nerf, then maybe you should just practice more. Perhaps try proving grounds. Can't blame blizzard for trying to help people without the skill to kill bosses.

[Deleted]

Word hunger, cancer, diseases, pollution, civil wars...he's "infuriated" by siege of orgrimmar nerfs.

I don't have world hunger, pollution or civil wars in my country. Very few diseases too and cancer isn't something worth getting upset about since I can't do anything about it.

I have WoW in my country though, so I care a lot more about WoW than someone far away from here getting shot in the head or has to watch his mother's corpse getting raped.

I have no reason to get upset over anything that doesn't affect me.

[Sar-]

Empathy is a dying trait, clearly.

[Raelbo]

now when we kill Garrosh I must, through no choice of my own, say 'Yeah we killed Garrosh, but only after the nerfs.' Could we have done it without the nerfs? Yes. This is a slap in the face.

I can see why are feeling upset, but I think with a bit of calm, rational introspection you would realise that you are overreacting.

Clearly you believe that by beating it "unnerfed" you are proving something, either to yourself, to your guild, your friends, your server, whatever. But really you aren't. The measure of how good you are is not about the absolute difficulty of the encounters but how long it took you to beat them.

The nature of WoW is that gear is actually a natural "nerfing" mechanism anyway. So the longer you take, the more the encounter gets "nerfed" by gear. In most cases, by this stage, the rate of progress is not going to be affected by you getting better at the game nearly so much as it is affected by how lucky you are with gear drops.

The only real concern you might have is if you one shot the last 3 bosses due to the nerf making them ridiculously easy, but I suspect that you'll still have some challenge left in the instance for a few months more

[Strepp]

All data used was strictly from wowprogress, it simply used the % of people wiping on a boss rather than the amount of people. You do not seem to understand the error in counting the amount of people rather than the % of people wiping on a boss.

It's you who is in error here: my numbers are all %'s against the total playerbase and the number of people raiding Heroics. You're looking at (# of people wiping)/(# of people attempting), claiming this represents the population when it is biased and does not. Your denominator represents a very small fraction of overall players: those who have progressed to the boss and are putting attempts in and wiping.
Let's say that in order to attempt Siegecrafter you have to kill Thok first (or people choose to do it this way). 1.24% of players have killed Heroic Thok, 0.6% have killed Heroic Siegecrafter. You keep saying 50% of players are wiping on Heroic Siegecrafter, which isn't entirely true: only 0.64% of players are wiping to Heroic Siegecrafter, 50% of the people who've progressed there. Furthermore, if you assume a steady influx of people attempting Siegecrafter, and an average of 2 lockouts to kill him, then you would average a 50% fail rate.
So stop inflating statistics to try and make a point when there's nothing wrong with the numbers you're arguing for.

And you say that nerfing earlier bosses has 0 effect and is pointless?
Let me ask you this: what's better for the game and the community? That a few more guilds get Heroic Garrosh kills (if these nerfs double the amount of people who are 14/14H that puts the total around 0.46%) or that many more guilds get into Normal and Heroic raiding? The elitist attitude of posters here (not saying its you, but go and read the number of posts between yours and my response that say "not enough skill") doesn't help anything. Nerfing the last 4 bosses swells the 14/14H club's membership sure, but does so at the expense of the community. 39%(!) of people have killed LFR Garrosh. If half their number came over to raid Normal and Heroics, Blizzard would spend more money and time on the Normal and Heroic raids, making it better for everyone.

[Deleted]

-snip-

So... Let me get this straight. What you are saying is that it makes more sense to nerf bosses that has the higest kill success rates of all heroic bosses in the history of heroic raiding that players have no problem killing, instead of nerfing the bosses that has amongst the highest failure rates in the history of heroic raiding that are roadblocks that keeps players wiping.

Yes... Yes... Your standpoint seem completely fine, everyone else posting in this thread is totally an elitist with skewered view of the game.

Really, the amount of people wiping on a boss is completely irrelevant without taking into account the amount of people that completed the boss. Thok did not need nerfs in 25 man, because its relative failure:success rate was acceptable, 10 man wasnt. Paragons nerfs are entirely aimed at 25 man guilds as the mechanics nerfed are trivial in 10 man, paragons failure:success rate was too high in 25 man while good in 10 man.

If a boss is too difficult or not, depends on the people that actually do the boss. If a higher amount of guilds is wiping on Siegecrafter than the amount of guilds that killed it, then something is horribly wrong and needs to be adressed. It does not matter if the number of guild are small, as it is insanely high relatively speaking.

By your logic the instance that needs the most nerfing is P1 LFR as it has the most characters in it.

[Deja Thoris]

Strepp, fireflys statistics attempt to point out why those bosses were nerfed by showing the completion rate on them. It's lower than other bosses, hence the conclusion that the nerfs were targeted at the correct bosses.

Your first post in the thread said
" I for one feel kinda cheated. It has nothing to do with "losing the race", because I couldn't care less about who's beating bosses before I do. To me this is like getting halfway through hard mode and being told I wasn't good enough to beat it so they're reducing the difficulty before I've even had a chance to lose at it. I WANT that chance to lose."

Now you say
And you say that nerfing earlier bosses has 0 effect and is pointless?
Let me ask you this: what's better for the game and the community? That a few more guilds get Heroic Garrosh kills (if these nerfs double the amount of people who are 14/14H that puts the total around 0.46%) or that many more guilds get into Normal and Heroic raiding? . Nerfing the last 4 bosses swells the 14/14H club's membership sure, but does so at the expense of the community. 39%(!) of people have killed LFR Garrosh. If half their number came over to raid Normal and Heroics, Blizzard would spend more money and time on the Normal and Heroic raids, making it better for everyone.

So you've moved from feeling cheated "because you wanted a chance to lose" to deciding the best thing for the game would be to nerf all the early stuff to make it more accessible (and hence denying all those people that chance to lose!?)


I'm a little confused as to what your actual point is at this stage. It looks like you are arguing for the sake of it. This thread is about the justification (or otherwise) of the nerfs to later HC bosses, not accessibility of raiding as a whole.

[Deleted]

Heh kinda huge changes to it imo. We 4 healed it and after 30% our beltgroup pretty much died and couple belts went thru but we killed it regardless. Its much more forgiving to mistakes now, couple stacks of superheated coupled with add aoe burst damage doesnt kill you anymore etc. Still harder than Thok by miles.

[Deleted]

So you've moved from feeling cheated "because you wanted a chance to lose" to deciding the best thing for the game would be to nerf all the early stuff to make it more accessible (and hence denying all those people that chance to lose!?)

It's very different if you're affected by it yourself or not I presume. It's frustrating to know that you could kill it without nerfs, but blizzard takes that chance away from you. One can dislike the nerfs, while still understanding the reasoning. Similarly nerfing the earlier bosses might actually be a good idea even though we don't agree with it (and god knows I do not).

I feel like this whole discussion filled with entitlement (me for instance) could have been avoided entirely if blizzard had announced those changes something like a month in advance.

[Palinn]

Why is there even a need for instance-wide adjustments in heroic at this stage? We already have multiple layers of redundant versions - lfr, flex, normal, heroic. People have access to the content already. If there are still guilds having problems running normal mode then make some nerfs there. If those folks want a challenge they can always go up a level to heroic.

They can make nerfs/adjustments at the pre-expansion patch (5.0 6.0 whatever we're on) so that people can cruise through/gear up for WoD. At that stage the game will be so different with abilities that clearing the content won't matter anymore anyway.

[Filed]

You are missing a key thing: You have bad timing.

People have had a stable core raiding group for a while, got mostly BiS for what they can kill, and are stuck. In order for them to see the content, there needs to be some SLIGHT nerfs to allow for progression.

Your situation is a perfect example of bad timing. There's always the next tier (for which, you will hopefully have a core raid team).

[Dole4011]

Can you believe they nerfed MSV? My guild was going to do that one without any buffs/nerfs. So pissed.

[MasterOfNone]

Yes it is a game, a game that I still put a decent amount of time and effort into, like any hobby. Yes other people play the game, and we're being punished with nerfs because of it.

- - - Updated - - -


I knew it was coming sooner or later, it just hurts more now as it actually affects me.

Lol punished. Could we be a little less self centered?

[clevin]

You are missing a key thing: You have bad timing.

People have had a stable core raiding group for a while, got mostly BiS for what they can kill, and are stuck. In order for them to see the content, there needs to be some SLIGHT nerfs to allow for progression.

And, if the OP and those who agree with OP were catered to it would hurt those people. There's a large subset of players who cannot seem to understand that it's impossible to satisfy everyone and for every decision that they like or which benefits them, there's someone else who dislikes it or feels that it hurts them. Some of you might be fine banging your heads against a boss for 500 tries, but it's perfectly possible that for every raid like that there are more (perhaps many more) who would simply stop raiding. Blizzard wants those people to be able to continue while not making it faceroll to do so and if there really are far more of then than of you, guess which group 'wins'? Be honest, if you could make a change that 10 raid groups liked and 2 didn't, what would you do? Turn that around.... if you could not make that change and please 2 groups but piss off 10 groups....?

[Strepp]

'm a little confused as to what your actual point is at this stage. It looks like you are arguing for the sake of it. This thread is about the justification (or otherwise) of the nerfs to later HC bosses, not accessibility of raiding as a whole.

Why is there even a need for instance-wide adjustments in heroic at this stage? We already have multiple layers of redundant versions - lfr, flex, normal, heroic. People have access to the content already. If there are still guilds having problems running normal mode then make some nerfs there. If those folks want a challenge they can always go up a level to heroic.

They can make nerfs/adjustments at the pre-expansion patch (5.0 6.0 whatever we're on) so that people can cruise through/gear up for WoD. At that stage the game will be so different with abilities that clearing the content won't matter anymore anyway.

This is pretty much my point. Why is hard Heroic mode a bad thing? Blizzard has been struggling to keep people interested for the entirety of the tier. Their solution for T16 was to make entry Heroics more accessible and make Heroics more linear, both in progression and in difficulty. That way everyone would fall out somewhere along the line. Their solution to WoD is to make nigh-impossible BiS lists. I would hazard the guess that in WoD they won't be nerfing mythic content, and will tune the 4 difficulties in such a way that people will have some goal to chase, and I anticipate the complaints of "The right gear isn't dropping so now my guild can't clear Heroics please nerf" (the same thing happened in D3 with the difficulty of acquiring the proper stats on gear and beating Inferno).

Tweaking the balance of Siegecrafter so 10m is in line with 25m is fine, but nerfing because people are complaining about too many wipes is not, especially when they've implemented a system that's supposed to be hard to give you something to do.

People seem to have this expectation that "nerfs happen every tier, deal with it", but they don't have to. With 4 modes of raiding, they can leave the hard mode as is. The strategy of gradually adjusting hard modes to keep people interested is no longer necessary when they have drastically different difficulty levels, both between modes and between wings within a mode. As Palinn says, if people find Normal too hard they can nerf it, and when it's too easy they can move to Heroics. In Heroics the only way to move up is to have harder bosses, but nerfing them takes that away and puts your guild in farm mode sooner.