Smallest entry raid tier ever

[Deleted]

So, Blizzard wants Mythic+ to be the new end game. Changing the loot system to forced personal and removing the tier sets was the first step. Now, we only got a small entry raid compared to...

BC: 15 bosses (12 in Karazhan, Magtheridon and 2 in Gruul's Lair)
WotLK: 16 bosses (14 in Naxxramas, Malygos and Sartharion)
Cata:14 bosses (6 in BWD, 6 in BoT, 2 in TofW)
MoP: 16 bosses (6 in MSV, 6 in HoF, 4 in ToeS)
WoD: 17 bosses (7 in HM, another 10 in delayed BRF)
Legion: 17-20 bosses (7 in EN, 3 in additional ToV, 10 in delayed NH)
BfA: only 8 bosses (Uldir)

One can say "Hey, all of the last expansions had only a small entry raid with delayed tier raid." But during MoP, WoD und Legion, we already knew the real tier raid and it was already in the game (only non-accessible). Now, we don't know anything about the new raid and it will take a while until it's released.

So, next patch will be one small raid again with a maximum of seven bosses but three to four new dungeons for Mythic+!?

Uldir is the EN of legion, the next portion of this raid tier which will feature Azshara as the Gul'dan of Legion, will be coming early next year.

They said on average they like 9-13 bosses for the actual tier instance, so Azshara's raid will be at least 9 bosses.

[ONCHEhap]

Just because they haven't revealed the other raids for the first tier of the expansion doesn't mean they don't exist

[Deleted]

Too bad they were all buggy as shit.

And had less design and encounter elements compared to current world rares.

- - - Updated - - -

because NH was in beta and on PTR - this time most probably Uldir will be the only raid of first tier.

blizzard is clearly cutting costs - wouldnt surpse me if we hear in near future that warfronts is what costed us 2nd raid of first tier.

No lol. They said they wanted the pause between EN and NH to be longer, they then said Azshara is the next raid instance of the 1st BFA raiding tier and it will have Azshara to be the Gul'dan of NH. Since Azshara's raid will probably be in one of her domains, meaning where N'zoth resides, they probably want to get that zone completely right. Given the current problems with their content, that was a good decision on their behalf.

- - - Updated - - -

There is a difference between entry raid and first tier. Tiers are gone so, they can't be used for referance anymore.

In short, you are wrong. Your hate campaign failed, try again.

The Tier system never referred to actual tier pieces, it referred to the chronological order of raids.

Sorry, your moment of trying to be smart, failed, try again.

- - - Updated - - -

Just to clear this up:

Karazhan was a raid, given the tier pieces, and Naxxramas was the game’s most popular raid instance in an opening tier.

Don’t let personal preferences get in the way of objective reality, please.

Back then Naxx was epic, but compared to now, it looks like a random normal dungeon.

It just can't compete with Ulduar, ToT and ICC on virtually any level.

[Thagrynor]

So basically, you are saying that Nighthold, which released literally 5 months after Legion launch, is part of tier 1? And if it is, does that mean that if a raid releases January (5 months after BfA release), it will be part of the same tier? Or not? Your point is stupid, and its toon soon to make such a bold claim. Come back with this stupid thread after we hear of the release for the next tier.

Technically, it was and the currently, the Tier system no longer functions as a usable system for denoting content launches. But it is technically only depending on how you define the tier system (which shifted between previous expansions and this expansion). Previously, a Tier was (most commonly) defined by everything from after the raid the completed the previous tier set until the end of the raid that completes the current tier set. Which would mean, for the sake of MoP, everything that came after Dragonsoul but before Throne of Thunder, regardless of release date and ilvl. Now, tier should refer to the change in ilvl since there are no tier sets to delineate different raids by tier.

However, NH was part of the intro tier since there were 3 tier sets, the first of which dropped in NH. That makes EN and ToV part of the same "tier" (at least in the sense of denoting it as everything after the raid that finished the previous tier set through the next tier set). Which means, if Tier existed, it likely wouldn't be in Uldir, but in the next raid so yes, Uldir would likely be part of that same tier as the next raid, even if that raid released 5 months after launch. The bigger problem with the tier system is that, they stopped doing individual raids per tier and started splitting everything up which muddied the waters entirely.

It is far easier now for denoting difference in "tiers" simply because you are able to ignore the sense of "tiers" by tier sets and look based on ilvl comparisons between the same difficulty.

So, at least imo, if there is at least a 15 ilvl difference between Normal Uldir and Normal whatever the next raid is, I would say they were different tiers, which means this would be the smallest intro tier.

[meroko]

This is the first time the first raid since MoP has had the glory achieve totally within that first raid, so all information points to this being an 8 boss “tier”.

That really doesn't mean anything. You're acting like they cant have separate Glory achievements for separate raids, which they do ALL THE TIME.

[Deleted]

The Tier system never referred to actual tier pieces, it referred to the chronological order of raids.

Sorry, your moment of trying to be smart, failed, try again.

.

"The tier system never refered to actual tier pieces".

The voice of knowledge right here.

I'll put in on the shelf next to: "Truth isn't truth".

Yes, you really showed me! xD

[ceall]

So, Blizzard wants Mythic+ to be the new end game. Changing the loot system to forced personal and removing the tier sets was the first step. Now, we only got a small entry raid compared to...

BC: 15 bosses (12 in Karazhan, Magtheridon and 2 in Gruul's Lair)
WotLK: 16 bosses (14 in Naxxramas, Malygos and Sartharion)
Cata:14 bosses (6 in BWD, 6 in BoT, 2 in TofW)
MoP: 16 bosses (6 in MSV, 6 in HoF, 4 in ToeS)
WoD: 17 bosses (7 in HM, another 10 in delayed BRF)
Legion: 17-20 bosses (7 in EN, 3 in additional ToV, 10 in delayed NH)
BfA: only 8 bosses (Uldir)

One can say "Hey, all of the last expansions had only a small entry raid with delayed tier raid." But during MoP, WoD und Legion, we already knew the real tier raid and it was already in the game (only non-accessible). Now, we don't know anything about the new raid and it will take a while until it's released.

So, next patch will be one small raid again with a maximum of seven bosses but three to four new dungeons for Mythic+!?

I guess I will have to correct you here.
Mop was the expansion that started with entry raids.
-mop: 6 in MSV
-wod: 7 in HM
-legion: 7 in EN (maybe ToV with 3, but it wasn't really entry level that)
-bfa: 8 in uldir

In fact, uldir is the biggest entry raid ever. All the raids after the ones I have listed have been traditional raid TIERS (that's why we called the sets t18 for example).

[Jyggalag]

well you are part of a minority there pretty much everyone i know and i raided with a lot of people in wod hated margok
he was an endurance boss that did not do shit for 10 minutes and then if you fucked up had to start doing the 10 minute of nothing over again
also move from the mines

Yep I cleared it top 40 world raiding 12 hours/week. For good guilds, it was a well tuned and satisfying fight. Though I can see how shitters can conclude challenging = bad design

[Kelathos]

Looks to me that we have one extra boss over EN.

[Soluna]

Technically, it was and the currently, the Tier system no longer functions as a usable system for denoting content launches. But it is technically only depending on how you define the tier system (which shifted between previous expansions and this expansion). Previously, a Tier was (most commonly) defined by everything from after the raid the completed the previous tier set until the end of the raid that completes the current tier set. Which would mean, for the sake of MoP, everything that came after Dragonsoul but before Throne of Thunder, regardless of release date and ilvl. Now, tier should refer to the change in ilvl since there are no tier sets to delineate different raids by tier.

However, NH was part of the intro tier since there were 3 tier sets, the first of which dropped in NH. That makes EN and ToV part of the same "tier" (at least in the sense of denoting it as everything after the raid that finished the previous tier set through the next tier set). Which means, if Tier existed, it likely wouldn't be in Uldir, but in the next raid so yes, Uldir would likely be part of that same tier as the next raid, even if that raid released 5 months after launch. The bigger problem with the tier system is that, they stopped doing individual raids per tier and started splitting everything up which muddied the waters entirely.

It is far easier now for denoting difference in "tiers" simply because you are able to ignore the sense of "tiers" by tier sets and look based on ilvl comparisons between the same difficulty.

So, at least imo, if there is at least a 15 ilvl difference between Normal Uldir and Normal whatever the next raid is, I would say they were different tiers, which means this would be the smallest intro tier.

No need to explain to me what is a tier and what isn't. I know that all to well, as I've been a 10-11 year veteran of WoW. I was just making fun of OP's stupid attempt to whine for an issue that doesn't even exist (at least yet) in the first place.

[Pua]

Back then Naxx was epic, but compared to now, it looks like a random normal dungeon.

It just can't compete with Ulduar, ToT and ICC on virtually any level.

Yet it saw participation levels that only Sartharion competed with, prior to Icecrown and dwarfing most everything since.

Naxxramas was a phenomenally successful raid - nothing comes close to it.

[Thagrynor]

No need to explain to me what is a tier and what isn't. I know that all to well, as I've been a 10-11 year veteran of WoW. I was just making fun of OP's stupid attempt to whine for an issue that doesn't even exist (at least yet) in the first place.

How is a comment that shows you don't realize that yes, EN and NH WERE the same tier, regardless of timing and actual tier set status, "making fun" of his attempt to whine about something? It makes you look like you have no idea what you are talking about. And don't try to use time played as some sort of status. I have played since Beta. And there are plenty of people who, despite playing that long, STILL don't seem to get basic concepts.

And if you know "what is a tier and what isn't", why ask the question in the first place? If you knew that EN and NH were the same tier, why question it? If you knew they weren't, why equate the time between their releases to a non-tier set situation that we have now where past definitions do not apply? There is no mockery in that, unless you are trying to mock yourself. So maybe get off your high horse and realize that, when the next raid comes out, if it is 15-30 ilvl higher in Normal, then it would technically be a different tier (by what anyone might use as a current definition with the lack of tier sets), which means that, guess what? This was the smallest intro tier.

Additionally, your use of things like EN and NH as somehow the standard (given your use of the time between release dates) is also invalid because they had mentioned NH right around launch. Sure, it wasn't in the game, but it was made known it was part of the "release" raid tier, with Tomb being the second tier and Argus being the third, both of which were announced much later. Unlike that situation (same with HoF/MSV and other situations), Uldir was announced as the only raid, with no shortly (if you call 5 months short) following raid being announced around launch. For all we know, the next raid is 4.5 months off. Even being in that magical 5 month window you quote, given the likely ilvl disparity, it won't be same tier, nor will it be introductory.

So your entire argument is ridiculous.

I do agree with you that it is a bit early to really tell if this is the only "intro" raid to the expansion since nothing has been announced further. But at the same time, given that we are a month in and not a single word of the second raid has been mentioned, the OP isn't entirely ridiculous for wondering and worrying that this tier will be a very short one, given that many people are finding themselves with little to do once they complete major parts (admittedly that could be due to lack of raids/warfronts/pvp seasons/M+, but it is still a dangerous situation to be in having players bored 3 weeks into an expansion).

[Dangg]

Kara, Mag, Gruul, SSC and TK were all available at launch, so TBC actually had 25 bosses available at launch, with Hyjal and BT coming in a later patch.

They weren't functioning properly so I wouldn't count that.

- - - Updated - - -

Naxxramas was a phenomenally successful raid - nothing comes close to it.

Why do you measure success with "Participation level"? Because it was pisseasy it was 'phenomenally successful'?

[hulkgor]

snip

How exactly is it the smallest entry level raid "ever" when you had Highmaul and Emerald Nightmare with 7 bosses on the last 2 expansions?

[razisgosu]

Legion had 7, Uldir is 8, OP can't count. Quality post.

[Enkrypt]

The desperation for something, ANYTHING negative to rant about is almost enough to turn my stomach. People like OP are truly sad individuals, in my opinion. Instead of simply enjoying the game, you're actively searching and compiling information just make a stupid claim that BFA has less bosses a month in compared to Legion having more bosses 3 months in.

Even if we knew the next raid had 12 bosses in it, when it was going to release, and where the raid portal is... you'd complain that the raid came out 2 days later than Nighthold.

There is no fucking pleasing some of you.

[Saverem]

Legion: 17-20 bosses (7 in EN, 3 in additional ToV, 10 in delayed NH)

Legion only had EN initially. ToV didn't come out for like 3 months and then NH didn't come out until the following year.


So... WRONG.

BfA is currently 1 boss ahead of what Legion had at this time in their release.

[Alvito]

Kara, Mag, Gruul, SSC and TK were all available at launch, so TBC actually had 25 bosses available at launch, with Hyjal and BT coming in a later patch.

Yes they were in game but they were gated behind weeks of qualifiers. That is the same as saying Tomb was in game when broken shore launched even though we couldn't access if for 2 months.

[Dziubla]

Legion: 17-20 bosses (7 in EN, 3 in additional ToV, 10 in delayed NH)
BfA: only 8 bosses (Uldir)

You do remember that ToV was introduced 2 months after release, and NH 5 months after? Why are you including those? If you want to compare Legion to BfA, compare EN with Uldir. And you will notice we got one boss more.

[Deleted]

HoV is a dungeon.
ToV was introduced in November, 2 months after Legion launch.
Would you say that by then BfA would be over with the entry raid/s?

Try again. Your facts are wrong