Reminder: 50% off of Character Services ends today!

Blues Read Everything, Blue Posts, Loroese's Arcane Mines Guide

Malfurion Stormrage Emotes, Gameplay Tooltip Text

Flex Raiding Q&A
Ghostcrawler spent some of his weekend answering questions about Flex Raiding! Reading all of the tweets is worth it if you are interested in the feature, but here are some of the major points:

  • Flex difficulty support can be added to old raids in the future, but currently only raids from Patch 5.4 and beyond are planned to support it.
  • LFR is designed to clear the entire raid in one night, but flex raiding will be closer to normal raiding, getting one boss or so a week if you are the target audience.
  • A shared lockout with LFR or Normal doesn't work, as it would punish people who ran LFR or Normal and then want to do a Flex run with friends.
  • Scaling Normal or Heroic would be very challenging, as some bosses would be much easier on one group size than another.
  • Being able to use the regular loot system instead of Raid Finder style loot is an option for future patches, not Patch 5.4.
  • There is a chance the scaling may go down a little bit lower than 10, but that isn't a promise.

Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
Hey! flexible raids - people may say it's a disappointment , but for me it's a great news, congratulations on the new feature!
"I am not the audience for this feature, therefore it sucks," is a very old argument. It happens. (Source)

I don't know Morello, but I agree with a lot of what he says.
In Vanilla and BC, just leveling, making alts, profs etc. were entertaining enough for a lot of players. A very few raided. (Source)
In LK, largely from Naxx 25, many players discovered raiding, and it was fun for them. (Source)
In Cat, we made 10s harder so that 10 and 25 could deliver the same ilevel. But this pushed some out of raiding. (Source)
We offered LFR to provide raiding back to those players. It worked reasonably well. But it doesn't quite feel like raiding. (Source)
Our hope is that Flex mode does feel like raiding. (Source)

New Flex raids, what about boss mechanics? Low sense of accomplishment in LFR, they feel oversimplified or easily ignored.
LFR is designed with the intent that you will finish in one night. We want Flex to be more traditional raiding. (Source)
By which I mean that you might only get one new boss a week or so (assuming you're the target audience). (Source)

Will Flex Raiding be something we can use for Throne of Thunder?
No, at least not initially. It wasn't designed with that in mind, but retrofitting isn't totally out of the question. (Source)

lots of noise to see signal. Will Flex be an option for T14 and T15? Or T16 only?
Only the new 5.4 raid initially. We may add other raids over time, but it's not a simple change to convert. (Source)

how will flex raids handle healer ratios? is 15man with 1 healer going to be as viable as 10man with 3?
Bring as many healers as you think you need. I would get 2-3 if you have 10 total as a good start. Maybe 1 more for every 5 total. (Source)

I like the idea of flex raiding. Curious how will the number of battle res scale with group size?
We will probably just make it 3, as in the 25 raids. Maybe no limit. We haven't decided yet. (Source)

Can't the the normal difficulty be replaced by new the Flexible Raid? I didn't see the need for them to coexist...
They are just different audiences. Civilization and Halo support many difficulty levels. It's a common solution to difficulty. (Source)
In those games however I'm usually only playing one difficulty at a time. Do you expect people will do that?
I often play new game+ when I finish with a game. It just depends on the audience. (Source)

if you put in Flex raiding, disable LFR for 5.4 please, we don't need them both.
LFR serves a valuable purpose, but it's ideally a back up plan, not the only way you experience WoW. (Source)
You say 'backup plan', but LFR's presence has undermined so many aspects of the game. Teams, community, concept of journey.
So don't run it if you don't like it? For other players it gave them a chance to raid that didn't exist for them before. (Source)
There is this myth that most LFR raiders were former N raiders. By and large this is not true. Most of them were not prior raiders. (Source)

I have to disagree. I would rather do Flex raid than LFR, since I cannot commit to normal raids. Friends>strangers
We would rather you do Flex. We think you'll have more fun. But disabling LFR isn't the right motivation in our minds. (Source)

to me LFR is to see the content and lore. Normal modes are for challenges and gear
LFR is also good for alts or on weeks when you can't make your raid or when you're between guilds. (Source)
But I would submit that it's a lot more fun to joke around with your friends that with random strangers. (Source)

The seeing of the content is the real incentive to get people into raids. LFR accomplishes that at a far easier lvl
You can see the content on Youtube. Experiencing a challenge and getting loot are fun too. (Source)

thoughts on limiting lfr? Say 10/12 available bosses -> incentive to push normals, exclusivity for norm/hc.
Potentially. We all like exclusive content. You just can't let that come at the expense of content in general. (Source)

Now with FlexR getting implement, could you remove tier pieces from LFR? They should only be accessible in FlexR/N/H raids
We discussed that idea, but instead there will be items only available in F/N/H mode. (Source)
just tier or all items ?
We discussed limiting tier items but are more likely to limit some other kinds of items. (Source)
The concern is that LFR needs some rewards - we aren't trying to kill it or else we'd just disable it. (Source)

I know players complained about the game being hard, but the game was healthier back then. It was growing, it was exciting.
It was growing, but it's hard to point to raid difficulty as the reason why. (Source)
You could point to having fewer specs or no mass rez, but I don't think those are reasonable explanations. (Source)
Just because Y had characteristic X does not mean X caused Y. (Source)
But hopefully in your case, Flex will give you back some of what you're missing in LFR. (Source)

If you can see all the content without any effort, people opt for that. LFR is probably responsible for sub loss.
The fact is, WoW always lost lots of players. In the past, we tended to get as many or more new ones as we lost. Lately, less. (Source)
Also, an awful lot of players we lose never even make it to endgame content. (Source)
because your aiming your game at casual fans who join and leave. making same mistakes as nintendo
I don't know. Blizzard and Nintendo both seem to have models that work out pretty well for them.... (Source)
nintendo have had a massive sale flop of the WiiU, wouldn't say its worked out that well.
Sure, but overall their track record is great. I'm still a fan. (Source)
I feel like they want to offer a mainstream experience with a ton of depth. Sounds like an awesome philosophy. We use it too. (Source)
and yet the casual market put them out of the next-gen run. Microsoft announced the same with Xbox one - share prices dropped.
I'm an industry insider, and even I wouldn't predict who has lost or won the next gen game yet. (Source)
What is your plan for /flex raids in regards to past content and gear? How will it work with...let's say Firelands or Ulduar
Flex is only for the 5.4 raid initially. (Source)

Combining 10/25 lockouts so people didn't feel obligated to do both.. Now we'll have three lock outs? What changed your mind?
It's a lesser of two evils thing. We changed the ICC model, but in retrospect maybe that wasn't the right call. (Source)
In game design, there are rarely no brainers. Usually you are trading off pros vs cons. This is no exception. (Source)

Flex raid: why not a shared loot lockout with LfR, so people don't feel 'forced' to do 3 raid difficulties per week?
"Hey, GC can you join our flex raid?" "Oh, sorry dude, I ran LFR on Sunday." (Source)
Thats ridiculous. "Hey, GC can you join our Hc raid?" "Oh, sorry dude, I ran Normal on Sunday".
With a few exceptions, H in particular is designed for set rosters not grabbing random dudes. Flex is all about grabbing whoever. (Source)
Why not allow N/HC guilds to flex too so they can be sure they have a raid on raid day and don't need to bench backups
It would be almost impossible to balance N or H for a variable group of people. Flex mindset isn't about min-maxing. (Source)

With the Flex raids opening in wings, can you start with any wing? Attempt the last boss without having to kill the first?
Not sure yet. (Source)

Are you waiting to see how 5.4 flex raids go before deciding whether to give n/h some flex? Or have you already ruled out?
We can't realistically scale group size for N or H because there would be bosses much easier on one group size than another. (Source)
That risk exists for Flex too, but remember the target audience is raiders who don't min max things like group size. (Source)
H players in particular would probably do a lot of "need 12 for boss A and 22 for boss B." Think that is less likely in flex mode. (Source)

I'm afraid flex-raid will make it even less attractive to graduate to real raiding. What would be the incentive for normals?
Do they need an incentive? We have a lot of players (not millions, but a lot) still struggling on Horridon. Flex is for them. (Source)
flex raids are for us? Your teams made the mistake, not ours. Normals don't need to be horridon hard.
We think Normal is serving its audience. Why deny them that? We can rename it Elite if the name bothers you. (Source)
It's not serving its audience. You've said so yourself that many are stuck on horridon.
Some are stuck on Horridon (and those are the audience for Flex). The success rate for Horridon overall is good. (Source)

A better question would be in time do you see "'flex" raid just replacing normals?
No, we like normals. We have a huge and diverse audience. We want to provide fun challenges for as many folks as we can. (Source)
What are your teams thoughts on how this will effect normals, their numbers and recruitment?
We expect people still wiping on Horridon at 8 weeks will shift to Flex instead. But, we predict most of the shift from LFR. (Source)

Also if your intent is to remove valor gear because flex raid is available I would caution you people do not like RNG
Some people just don't like raiding (even flex). We want to provide pathways for them to advance too. (Source)

What kind of difficulty level are we looking are for Flexible Raids? LFR tank and spanks or nearer to Normal?
Closer to Normal. We don't want the expectation to be that you clear it immediately, but we do want you to make progress. (Source)

Flexible Raids: Any concerns of burn out with three tiers of the same content? Note: Awesome idea, excited about seeing it.
Just pick the difficulty / size that best suits your interests. We don't think it works out well when we try to play game nanny. (Source)
The concern is valid, but when we try to save players from themselves it often backfires as often as it works. (Source)

No offense, but this new 'flex-raid' doesn't help when your realm has difficulty gathering even ten players.
Agreed, but it isn't intended to fix that problem. (Though you can invite friends from other realms.) (Source)

LOVE Flexible RAID idea. Just, PLEASE, don't use LFR loot for it. Use Normal Loot, to share gear between players
We don't yet have a solution for scaling no. of drops. We don't want you to hesitate to bring dude 15 because it means less loot. (Source)

Flex will use Personal Loot to avoid PUG drama, is it possible to let raid lead pick to use real loot system if just friends?
Not for 5.4 but if there is demand, we can look into adding the more traditional raid loot systems. (Source)
We don't currently have a system that lets a boss drop more loot that scales with size other than personal loot. (Source)
The problem is the scaling size. We don't want any pressure to not invite someone for fear of less loot. (Source)
This came up on EU forums (a couple of other posters suggested the same); thoughts?
It's not an unsolvable problem by any stretch but it's not a trivially solvable problem so it will likely have to wait. (Source)

Flexible raiding ticks a number of boxes. However, what does a group size of 11 or 12 mean for PoH and group bound spells?
Probably another good reason to kill that functionality of PoH... but not for 5.4. (Source)

Ji-Kun mount drop on Normal and Heroic mode, as far as I know. What about the new "Flexi-Raid" mode?
In general we want Flex to reward more cool stuff than LFR, Normal more than that and Heroic more than that. (Ji-Kun himself !flex) (Source)

new raid system sounds redundant - non25s can queue LFR, waste dev-time, leads to further cutting down LFR ilvl to squeeze in
There are a non-trivial number of players in more casual 10 raiding guilds who don't want to raid with strangers. (Source)

With Flex raiding, have you considered removing faction restriction for instanced PvE via battlenet? Are there Tech hurdles?
Mostly design hurdles. We like red vs. blue. (Source)

really love the flexible raid plan! Wish it scaled down below 10. 8 players would be great.
We *might* let it go a little lower, just so a late player can join you in progress rather than being replaced. #nopromises (Source)

Blue Tweets
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
What exactly is the Engineering "Sky Claw"? I've heard some blue talk about it not being released in 5.3 yet. Any explanation?
It was an Engineering mount that ended up having a lot of bugs. We're considering a different Engineering mount. (Source)

Game feels a bit sterile. Feel like focus is too much on metrics and not compelling gameplay. Balanced around rewards, My 2c
Does it feel like that when you're playing or when you interact with the community (and us) on the Internet? (Source)
I'd say in-game largely. Professions good example. Realized at the end they all mostly give 320 stat gain.
But that sounds like you are focused on the rewards for professions not the fantasy or fun of crafting. That's why I asked. (Source)
Not like BC where I could craft myself Primalstrike because it was really good for me, pre-raids. (Er... 3/2.)
We did have a problem in BC that certain crafted pieces were so good that many players felt like they had to re-learn professions. (Source)
Wasn't that mostly with Drums of Battle? Exhaustion-style debuff could've fixed that. Don't remember ppl changing early in exp
I meant like Stormherald and Frozen Shadoweave. (Source)
Ah, I see. On the other hand, those items sure made those professions compelling, didn't they?
Absolutely. Everyone always recalls it as the glory days of professions (at least for raiders). (Source)
But I can't help but think players would complain today if they felt "forced" to go Blacksmith for a tier. (Source)

If you could steamline 3 of WoW's systems with a magic wand, which ones would they be? (e.g Rotations, Gem Options, Profs)
Professions, end-game gearing direction, ability bloat. (Source)
What are your thoughts on removing power perks from professions? IMO perks harm the fantasy without adding much
My personal opinion is they are pretty lame and encourage players to choose professions for the wrong reasons. (Source)
nobody complained when you removed helm enchant
Are you serious? I was actually amazed at the outrage. We thought we were doing players a favor. (Source)

Why the +Cooking set bonus on "Tradition of Cooking" when it does nothing?
You mean because it doesn't help with the Ways? It was intended as an alt item, not really a shortcut to Cooking. (Source)

what exclusive is there then? Ra-den isn't story relevant. we've never seen him or heard of him
That you initially don't know who he is or how he fits in is WHY he is story relevant. (Source)
Mogu. Titan. Old god. Sha. Mantid. All these things are connected. (Source)

League of Legends Lead Content Designer on WoW
LoL's Lead Content Designer made some interesting posts about WoW. You can join the discussion on the forums and see Ghostcrawler's response in the Flex Raiding tweets.
Originally Posted by Morello (Source)
It's a tricky topic, because our job is to make decisions based on what players not only want, but need. Let me explain that a bit.

Determining what players want is actually pretty simple - your most invested users tend to be very vocal and will put effort into making sure they're heard (ie; most forumers!) This is a good metric of understanding what players want, at least for high-engagement folks.

What players need is where players don't proclaim a desire for something, but it helps provide something they say they want. Many times, this is more than a single solution - it requires several steps of implementation to reach a result, or takes time to bake in many cases. Let me provide two example of want vs need, and why want cannot be the only driver for developers;

At Riot, we nerf champions. Nerfs are rarely wanted (and many times, unwanted). But, players want to have a fair experience with a variety of options. Additionally, a game without power caps and heavy power creep (something still happening faster than I'd like...) can disrupt the core game design focused around choices, decision-making, and strategy. To accomplish this, we need to nerf champions, even if players don't explicitly want us to.

To use your example, in the pattern of Burning Crusade and Wrath of the Lich King, the changes to easier raid content and more accessibility is actually informed by a want that a lot of players expressed - IE, raids were content that was exclusive from them and they wanted a piece. I respect the guys who make WoW (and its success is a testament), but this is a good example of where the developers should have recognized the core need of exclusivity and the right tuning of that, and steered away from players said they wanted. Personally, I think Burning Crusade is a sweet spot.

The above is a fantastic example of why we have to make tough choices and not always just do what players ask us to do - it's not always the right course of action.

The problem you're speaking to, in my opinion, is when developers think they always have that answer and that being a developer gives you divination into what that is. In my mind, game development isn't about having answers - it's the ways in which you find them.

Our interaction on here isn't just lip-service, it's so we can better optimize decisions around player wants - and explain what players need when they don't want it. This informs us a lot, but we make decisions based on a number of factors - player desires and feedback being one of them.

I hope this helps explain how I feel about this, and how the developer/player interaction looks to me.

One other thing to watch is "the game used to be good when the game was less mature, and it sucks now because of changes" thing. Many times, players just get tired of a game after 1000's of hours, and that's natural. I still think WoW is a cool game, I just can't wring any more enjoyment out of it.

World of Warcraft, nerfed it for exceptionally terrible players and ruined quality of the game in by doing so because players who were bad, refused to accept that and get better.
No, that's the lens of your personal values - you believe your values of game-playing (skill mastery) is the reason all players should play the game. Many people play the same games for different reasons.

Or, sometimes, the changes are just bad. WoW was fun when you could have casual 25 man raids in WotLK. It stopped being fun in Cata when 25 man raids disappeared.

In SC2, the change to larger maps and ever increasing rush distances ruined it for me. I didn't like that a second Nexus/Hatchery/Command Center became the first building after supply structure/unit.

You could bury your head in the sand and insist that people left because they got bored or you could consider that your changes aren't universally loved.

Some changes are bad - and they can disengage players. I found Wrath of the Lich King less fun to raid than BC, but the reason I think it was a harmful direction was more what I think engages players overall - many of the things that do not engage me personally. "I quit WoW because there's not 40-man raids and now people other than me and my 39 friends can raid" is one of those things that would have low value, conversely.

The big difference in players get to think about their own experiences (and should!), where developers need to discover what groups of players need, what drives them, engages them and makes them feel rewarded.

WoW was bad. It is bad and it will continue to be bad. WoW had the simple blind luck to be in the right place at the right time.

The original concept was little more than Everquest with a few modifications. Quests were easier to find, enemies were better balanced for your level, and waiting for your life to regenerate took a lot less time. Aside from that the game was an ugly sack of fail. The raids were broken, literally, almost every raid was released in an unfinished and unbeatable state. We found out in AQ40 that this was done purposefully because Blizzard wasn't able to meet deadlines. I do not like to raid, I occasionally enjoy partying but by and by I like doing solo content or hunting for rare materials. So pretty much WoW has nothing for me because Riadrz want their super op weapon drop and god forbid you have allow a plebeian solo player farm mats to craft a weapon even 1/10th the quality of that thing. No, the items that are only 1/10th as good as Raid loot have materials that drop in Raids.

I hate WoW. I hate Blizzard. They took a fantasy universe I found to be brilliantly designed and destroyed it.

You don't like WoW (clearly!), but this is the attitude I'm saying is flatly incorrect. WoW is a well-crafted game that you do not happen to like. Our own personal tastes do not equate to what is good and bad in game development, only what our potential engagement is. And, to be frank, if you're not the audience, it has little impact on anyone else.

I don't like playing Halo. Halo is an extremely good game.

How could you think burning crusade was the "Sweet Spot". A majority of the players couldn't even get to 3/4's of those raids. Hardly anyone ever see's end game content. I mean, christ. Your mindset works for League of Legends just fine. I can't argue with the results. But I sure as hell can tell you that your mindset would of made WoW a worse game by far, and I would of left it after BC instead of sticking around for MoP. Do not go into the MMO Business again, as I think you were with Guild Wars right?
I'm saying I don't think raids should be inclusive, as the exclusivity of content creates a psychological trick in your brain that makes the game feel endless. Basically, my direction would be (and maybe incorrectly - I haven't tried!) that all content is not for everyone. If anything, League proves core gaming has a big audience, and you don't have to make things easy.

That's a fair assessment. I stopped playing Blizzard games when it became clear to me that my tastes were very different from the majority of their player base. I liked BC but never got to raid there. I liked it because even dungeons had progression with the keys and the hard Heroics. WotLK lost that in many ways, but the raids everyone could do became what Heroics were in BC for me. In Cata, there was little to no dungeon progression (it was even easier than WotLK) but raids were out of reach for me too. I spent 3 months playing as part of a guild in the hope to get into a raid group with no success. I canceled shortly after.
As a player, it was sort of the same for me.

Raids HAVE to be inclusive for the most part. Because that's the only major content in a MMO at max level on the PvE aspect of it. That's the only way to really "progress". How could you miss that? That's why there's heroic raids, so people who want challenging content can go and do that and feel exclusive. And even the new thing where there's a uber secret hard boss that is only unlocked in heroic mode.

I'm actually really startled you could miss something like that. I'm glad league of legends is a game where everyone can participate at max level.

You sure? The game has massive numbers even without accessible raid content - it was in a big period of growth during this time - many players who do not raid have plenty to keep them busy.

Since not everyone plays for mastery, and many play for achievement, over-time reward structures (dailies, rep grinds) engage the majority of the players. The minority still raids, but now it's lost the exclusivity. Are you sure your views are representative?

They may be - I don't have access to their data which could prove me wrong. I'm just checking to see if you're thinking about it from a holistic perspective or a personal one.

Keep Them busy?........Such as Dailies? Do you know how awful those things are? Dailies for everything these days......But yes, recently there's a huge amount of content that is not raiding, that you can certainly do. There's actually a staggering amount of things you can do in WoW that isn't raiding.

Yes, I believe my views are Representative. A much greater part of the minority raids now, I believe ghostcrawler threw a quote out there saying that the size of players seeing end game content was "staggering" now that LFR was out.

And there IS Exclusivity still in the form of heroic raids.

No one really has access to that sort of data except blizzard, but i distinctly remember ghostcrawler saying something similar to "Barely anyone has seen end game content, so we're coming out with Looking For Raid".

I mean, you're putting the bulk over your story and endgame content into raids, something (as you've said yourself) the minority of players will ever get to experience. Why limit that to such a small portion of the community? And also why bother making that content if only a small portion of the community could ever play it?

I think that's the decision-making process that has driven Blizzard - and clearly it is successful. I just think I'd value different design aspects of WoW if it were my decision to play up engagement over the long-term - a bit of less-is-more design.

Can you please teach Ghostcrawler how to properly balance the game then? Instead of throwing Hunter's under the bus like the "Redheaded Step Children Who Lives Behind The Staircase" that we are made to be.
I have a ton of sympathy and respect for Ghostcrawler; he's the face of an entire design team also. I don't think their balancing is really bad, either, I'm not in agreement with their overall high level design philosophy - not that it's bad, I just have a different conclusion. Within that philosophy, though, I think their balance methodology is really appropriate.

Innovation drives the gaming industry in one way or another, and WoW never innovated anything.

The 2 sided conflict of characters with different classes available (initially) had been done before in MMOs. Battlegrounds and CTF style combat had been done in other MMOs, Raid style content had be done before in MMOs. Crafting with almost identical systems existed in other MMOs before WoW. Seamless worlds existed prior.

Nothing World of Warcraft did was particularly unique or innovative. The main reason it became such a huge smash hit was because it was made by Blizzard. Being set in the Warcraft world made it instantly desirable to everyone that had played a Blizzard game, which was a LOT of people. They recruited their friends to play with them who pulled in friends, etc. And we get the legacy that is World of Warcraft.

Was it polished at the time excluding graphics? Sure, hell yeah. But to someone who has been playing the genre of games since Everquest, it was incredibly bland and uninspiring. Especially at launch.

Do I respect World of Warcraft? Of course I do. It's made gaming normal in every day life and an acceptable pastime. It made more money than you can imagine and brought my first and favorite genre of computer games to the masses. But it wasn't special. It wasn't particularly well crafted. It was just -VERY- well marketed.

But WoW redefined what MMO's are for an entire generation of gamers by using well-known methods to deliver the first "doesn't kick you in the balls over and over" theme park experience. While maybe it didn't invent gas powered engines, it certainly built the Model-T.

Innovation is a powerful thing to have, but it's not the only thing that defines a well-crafted game.

It's funny to me, personally, that you use World of Warcraft as an example and say that it lost "a ton" of players. I know personally I couldn't even stomach playing WoW before Wrath of the Lich King (and I bought Original when it released) because of how incredibly exclusionary the gameplay was if you were not in that top 5% . It really had nothing to do with time playing (I played JRPGs most of my young life, so I knew what it took to spend hundreds of hours on a game). I had no interest in committing 40 hours a week to preparing to play a game for 20 more hours that weekend. I feel THAT is what has been addressed by Blizzard, and save the nostalgics and the elitists (who I feel are similar to those on these forums who gripe about special skins not being so very special), no one has much of an issue with needing to do less mindless grinding to experience the actual purposes of the game.
Hardcore players, this feedback is not valuable. We know what happens if developers are too swayed here - you get new versions of an old game that has just enough difference to not pull you over (CS:GO, really the AWP cost being the same was important? No.), but not actually advance the series or genre in a meaningful way. Doing this disallows you to actually give the game any meaning - why does it exist, who is it for?

Now, developers have a responsibility here too; deconstruct why they're saying what they're saying. Many times, your hardcore fans want to ensure the new game has depth and skill. If you're changing how that's done, explain this process to your hardcore dudes. Don't pander or cave, just be upfront. If you're removing burden of knowledge/etc (things that most extremely hardcore gamers will latch on to as meaningful skill), be honest with it and try to evaluate that you're adding real skill mastery to your new game as well.

Your hardcore guys are valuable, but be careful to not let them rail your new game into total conservatism.

Weekly News Recap
Here is your chance to catch up if you missed a day of news this week!

This article was originally published in forum thread: Flex Raiding Q&A, Blue Tweets, LoL Lead Content Designer on WoW, News Recap started by chaud View original post
Comments 71 Comments
  1. Bantokar's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Ferrouswheel View Post
    Make sure to read this everyone. Written by a raider who shows up in quest greens, ungemmed, unenchanted. I mean what's the point right? If your guild is making you use flasks and food and gems and all that why would you stick around? There are plenty of guilds that won't force you to waste time on stuff like that.
    We get it. You are the worlds foremost elite wow raider with Ra-Den on solo farm, 100% flawless execution and you only grace these forums with your immaculate presence to inform us, the tiny skillles mortals of your superior raiding skills. We are not worthy.

    PS - You don´t have to be an elitist douche in 100% of your posts.
  1. Austilias's Avatar
    I hate LoL, but the guy in the interview was entirely right. WoW has been brought down in quality significantly by entitlement and general laziness. Any new MMO that is on par with Vanilla/TBC in terms of the effort required will certainly get a subscription from me.
  1. Deix-EU's Avatar
    The guy who says "Have you considered the impact of the Flex raiding on recruitement" is totally right.

    Instead of trying to solve a false problem (i.e : people not killing Horridon on NM), Blizzard is making the recruitement even harder. HC guilds with a roster limited ARE STRUGGLING (this is our case) because of other difficulties level.

    Fact :

    us : "hey our guild is recruiting ... blablabla"
    Poeple : "sorry dude, we do LFR ! or we raid with some guilds for normal"

    Guilds are struggling on NM mode because of LFR
    Guilds are struggling on HC because of guilds are struggling on NM and don't have the "level"
    ... snowball

    End of discuss, think this way Blizz' :

    What if there is only NM et HC ?

    - LFR people are more likely to join NM guild to get better
    - Normal people are more likely to join HC guild and have the gear to join them on progression

    And now ?

    Instead of :
    - People struggling on Horridon NM get recruited by guilds that farm it IF they want to

    You'll have :

    - Ok, so, let's get Flex mode

    Even if the idea sounds good for a "perfect system", you'd rather consider it's impossible to have a perfect one. Blizz' is dumbing down the game !
  1. Wolfster's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleredar View Post
    Because it isn't the same item...?
    How is it not the same item? tier bonuses have the same procs....trinkets have the same effects...every item is an exact copy only reduced stats and BC it meant something to wear the tier its meh...just another piece of gear you're wearing
  1. Ninjaderp's Avatar
    I love it how they shut down the "But Horridon is too hard, nerf normals!!" guys
  1. Paraclef's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Nahalya View Post
    Even if the idea sounds good for a "perfect system", you'd rather consider it's impossible to have a perfect one. Blizz' is dumbing down the game !
    You're right, like 10 mans killed 25 mans, flex will kill Normal mode. GC never learns.
  1. Powell's Avatar
    Exclusivity is just another way to feed elitists.
    Theres still exclusive content to the best players. Heroic raiding conten isn't for everyone.

    People just want to be special snowflakes. Tough luck, you're not.

    The arguments about the difficulty of WoW is the dumbest thing i've seen on these, or any other forums, by far.
    There are different levels of difficulty offered by Blizzard. And if thats not enough, feel free to make your own challenges.
    You can raid without pants. Raid with less people. Do dungeons with weapons only.

    Elitists are just mamas boys. They need to be hand held into the content provided by Blizzard, and still feel like they're the special case.
    Make your own damn challenges, there are plenty of options to play with.
  1. Gruffertus's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Nahalya View Post
    What if there is only NM et HC ?

    - LFR people are more likely to join NM guild to get better
    No, this is not (the majority of) the LFR audience, they are not going to suddenly switch from no-strings on-demand raiding to a situation where they have to turn up at a specific time and if there's too many they might get benched and if there's too few they'll have to bark in OG/SW for pugs - they'll just go back to not raiding.
  1. Pacster's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Nahalya View Post
    The guy who says "Have you considered the impact of the Flex raiding on recruitement" is totally right.

    Instead of trying to solve a false problem (i.e : people not killing Horridon on NM), Blizzard is making the recruitement even harder. HC guilds with a roster limited ARE STRUGGLING (this is our case) because of other difficulties level.

    Fact :

    us : "hey our guild is recruiting ... blablabla"
    Poeple : "sorry dude, we do LFR ! or we raid with some guilds for normal"

    Guilds are struggling on NM mode because of LFR
    Guilds are struggling on HC because of guilds are struggling on NM and don't have the "level"
    ... snowball

    End of discuss, think this way Blizz' :

    What if there is only NM et HC ?

    - LFR people are more likely to join NM guild to get better
    - Normal people are more likely to join HC guild and have the gear to join them on progression

    And now ?

    Instead of :
    - People struggling on Horridon NM get recruited by guilds that farm it IF they want to

    You'll have :

    - Ok, so, let's get Flex mode

    Even if the idea sounds good for a "perfect system", you'd rather consider it's impossible to have a perfect one. Blizz' is dumbing down the game !

    Sounds logical...only one problem: I quit raiding after Gruul and Kara(although we have been one of the top raid guilds on the server we had nearly no progress due to extremely hard and buggy encounters. The guild then fell apart.)...I didn't see a single raid instance untill lfr. I always quit the game whenever there was nothing left to do but raiding.
    See, no lfr did not make me join any normal raid guild...let alone heroic...I just quit then.
    Players like me will never ever(again) let a guild decide how often they have to spend 4-5hours of their evening in front of a computer screen.

    I think the true problem there are the dead servers(cause on dead server you just don't have enough players to choose from. On mine you have about 2-3raiding guilds and even they have problems to fill their roster no matter what skilllevel)...and the guilds themselves(sorry, if you only accept the best of the best with perfect equippment 24/7 online times but NO ego...well. There are many, many, many half filled guilds that just don't merge cause of the ego of the leaders...and that believe that it's not their job to teach new players.).

    LFR and the 150000 dailies, pet battles etc. just give players additional ways of playing without of having to face a "join a guild and do what they say or just quit due to boredom"-decision. If your guild is attractive and you are not on a dead server, you won't have a problem with recruiting. Period.

    I don't get flex at all. On dead server it won't work cause they don't have 10 for what a flexible raid with 11? If you have 10 players then you can go normal with better loot. To me that currently sounds like another mandatory raid for those progression guilds for the first 3-4 weeks of a new tier. Or maybe it can be used to test some new try outs. I don't see how this can help dead servers and I don't see why someone should do this on full servers(where people are always looking for random normal raids).
    Blizz seems to be obesessed with their cross-server-friendship idea...guess they hope it will get them more paid transfers. So far all my contacts that I made xrealm are the "I use you when I need you"(and vice versa)-type...and not one person I would miss if I lose my list. That's the xrealm reality.

    *4. It will be great for 10M guilds who constantly have to sit a few players.*

    As if ANY guild on this planet will take a 11th or 12th player with them if that means that the loot will be worse than they could get in normal. And given that the normal raid guilds only play 1-2 evenings per week, they just can't waste one for flex. If the flex-raid loot would be equal to normal...then it may work....but with the current setup it's just crap.
  1. Ronthok's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Azrile View Post
    One of the problems with the WOW community is most people cannot see past their own face.

    Flex-raiding will be a huge success to a few different segments of the population. Just because you personally do not see a purpose for it ( or for LFR for that matter) does not mean it isn´t an important addition to the game.

    1. It will be a step-down for guilds that are struggling on normal mode
    2. It will be a great way for 10M guilds to find new players in order to try to build to be a 25M guild
    3. It will be a great realm-pug thing for players (like me) who want more of a challenge than LFR, but don´t have the desire to schedule my week around a game.
    4. It will be great for 10M guilds who constantly have to sit a few players.

    I just sincerely hope they do not change the loot system as it is one of the reasons I avoid pugs to begin with. I hate loot drama.
    It will be a success, or won't. Flex raiding is hugely dependant on server base and/or realID friends. If you don't have enough, you wont have much use of it. On my server horde side got so little, that sometimes less than 50 peeps are online at prime time, how can you use flex on this conditions? Blizzard should work on the server problems.
  1. Yriel's Avatar
    "Exclusive content is awesome" - Lead designer of LoL, a game with no exclusive content at all.
  1. gend's Avatar
    It is the old problem.

    Will exclusive content entice players and motivate them?
    Or: Will it make people quit and switch to more casual games?

    Personally I think that WoW was successful enough in BC that changes like easier raids (for example Naxx25) were not needed. However once you give the casual players their candy (easier heroics and raids, etc.) the backlash will be increadible if you try to take it away again. We've seen that at the start of cata. It is all about expectations. If you don't expect to be able to see all content you won't be upset by it.

    So in my opinion the WoW devs made an unnecessary bad choice on game balance (they weren't preassured at all after BC) and now are unable to close pandoras box.

    My main problem with LFR is this:
    Does it actually entice casual players to play WoW (meaning they look forward to do LFR every week) or is it just another boring grind to them (like most farm content is to regular raiders)? Because if even the casuals are getting burnt out of LFR something is clearly wrong with the system.
  1. Frozenmerc's Avatar
    I WOULD say something about those rude comments the League of Legends player said, but then I remembered...
    A.) The Lead Designer is already taking care of it.
    B.) He's a League of Legends player.
  1. Magemaer's Avatar
    Yup, exclusive content is awesome. The way raiding is now, it is accessible and something you can spend time now and them, but definitely NOT exciting as it used to be on tbc where you worked hard for months to get that meaningful boss down, instead of joining a random que and killing him semi-afk.
    The investment/reward synergy was broken down. You invest little, receive little.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-10 at 02:36 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by gend View Post
    My main problem with LFR is this:
    Does it actually entice casual players to play WoW (meaning they look forward to do LFR every week) or is it just another boring grind to them (like most farm content is to regular raiders)? Because if even the casuals are getting burnt out of LFR something is clearly wrong with the system.
    I personally know a few new and casual players, and they hate LFR. They like doing it for 2-3 weeks, get to see bosses and stuff, get some loot, and get bored. They complain specially of low drops and overall lame raiding experience they get doing LFR. I know one that's only logging to solo old raids for pets, and says that 's way more funny than doing LFR.
  1. Rolly's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Bantokar View Post
    •A shared lockout with LFR or Normal doesn't work, as it would punish people who ran LFR or Normal and then want to do a Flex run with friends.

    So just remove the shared lockout and difficulty of 10 and 25 mans. Stop trying to bandaid past moronic decissions and just revert them. How hard can it be?
    But that would mean admitting they made a mistake, just like daily reps. Instead they'll piss away the precious "resources" they always talk about on creating new systems to fix past mistakes.
    It's common corporate behaviour, never admit to a mistake, even at the cost of more "resources".
    Blizzard is more corporation than gaming company now.
  1. Xjev's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Magemaer View Post
    I personally know a few new and casual players, and they hate LFR. They like doing it for 2-3 weeks, get to see bosses and stuff, get some loot, and get bored. They complain specially of low drops and overall lame raiding experience they get doing LFR. I know one that's only logging to solo old raids for pets, and says that 's way more funny than doing LFR.
    I think LFR is for hardcore, hard raid is for casuals who want to play a few hours per week and have some fun and challenge during those few hours no matter how many bosses you down. LFR, dailies, dungeons, rep farm, herb, mine gathering are for hardcore who want to play many many hours.
  1. Zoneseek's Avatar
    Not sure what was more interesting. Reading the OP or the replies on here by blizzard fanboys foaming at the mouth.
  1. Axefresh's Avatar
    Sure are a lot of angry nerds in the LoL Q&A. In the end, the game designers are always smarter than the players by a long shot. If given a chance, Im sure all those angry nerds would fail SOOOOOO horribly at making a game, they'd prolly commit suicide when they finally realize it.
  1. dragon171's Avatar
    •Flex difficulty support can be added to old raids in the future, but currently only raids from Patch 5.4 and beyond are planned to support it."

    Lies! Dungeon Journal and LFR isn't even covered to the old stuff. Blizz will wait til 2 expac's to pass before they think about making this true lol
  1. Adalace's Avatar
    That LoL developer dialog was the best thing I've read on here in a long time.

Site Navigation