Scenarios: a Poll.

[Jester Joe]

It's stupid because it's a massive, embarrassingly obvious exaggeration. Sure, as Jester Joe says, maybe it does take longer to create raids now (although 10s and 25s back then were also even more separate, and even had completely different loot tables).

But if you're actually laboring under the delusion that the creation of 1 dungeon would halve the size of the raid in the same tier.. Well, my friend, I think we're done here. Oh.. and they said their design team is now the biggest it's ever been. So yeah. How coincidental that we're getting our lowest ever number of dungeons on release of WoD.

Sorry, I don't consider different loot tables "longer" work as you're implying.
Did you forget we have 4 raid difficulties to balance now, AND still 10 to 25 mans? Back then it was only normal and heroic, with 10 and 25 mans.
So you can't compared what was done in Wrath to MoP really, I think it's common sense it takes longer to create raids now.

[Mongoose19]

Waste of a content. Boring and easy as fuck.

[Terahertz]

what do you think of heroic scenarios though? They aren't as much of a zerg fest.

They aren't? Last time I checked highest DPS generally tanks and if the DPS isn't actually shit it's still a zerg fest. HC Scenarios are actually pretty much soloable. Which is why I heavily dislike scenarios. They're boring and add nothing to do game except worthless and in general boring storyline.

I did like the solo scenarios given on the isle of thunder, but that's about it. The 3 man SCs are IMO a waste of resources UNLESS they -actually- provide decent and worthwhile loot.

Because currently, the loot bags you get from the normal SCs have a "chance" of giving ilvl 463 loot while HC scenarios also have a "chance" (Haven't gotten a single item from HC scenarios on my freaking mage).

So yeah, unless they make scenarios actually worthwhile I won't be running them.

[Constraint]

Sorry, I don't consider different loot tables "longer" work as you're implying.
Did you forget we have 4 raid difficulties to balance now, AND still 10 to 25 mans? Back then it was only normal and heroic, with 10 and 25 mans.
So you can't compared what was done in Wrath to MoP really, I think it's common sense it takes longer to create raids now.

I strongly doubt the teams which create the dungeon/raid art/animations/scenery/mechanics etc are responsible for testing raid balance. I'm quite happy to be proven wrong, however. Tweaking numbers might take a while, especially the testing phase, but I'd hazard a guess that the former is significantly more time-consuming and resource-intensive. Tuning numbers (which, as patch notes clearly prove, can be continued even while the raid is live) is rather obviously the downhill slope at the end of the cycle.

[felcommander]

I hate them, personally I think the only reason they are "successful" is because of the rewards they offer.

[Jester Joe]

I strongly doubt the teams which create the dungeon/raid art/animations/scenery/mechanics etc are responsible for testing raid balance. I'm quite happy to be proven wrong, however. Tweaking numbers might take a while, especially the testing phase, but I'd hazard a guess that the former is significantly more time-consuming and resource-intensive. Tuning numbers (which, as patch notes clearly prove, can be continued even while the raid is live) is rather obviously the downhill slope at the end of the cycle.

Even if they're not, they are still linked. The more dungeons/raids put out, the more they have to be tested, so I still stand by 4 raid difficulties being more work than 2.

Also, I'm not sure what you mean by former? The loot tables still, or numbers? Kinda vague there with that, but still, I highly doubt loot tables are that hard to make, since it's just recolored gear, different stats, and a different name.

[AeneasBK]

As long as you run them through first time around with friends at a nice slow pace to get all the RP in they are great THen they make for fast VP farming if you're solo playing *shrug* I'm pro scenarios always have been

[Constraint]

They aren't? Last time I checked highest DPS generally tanks and if the DPS isn't actually shit it's still a zerg fest. HC Scenarios are actually pretty much soloable. Which is why I heavily dislike scenarios. They're boring and add nothing to do game except worthless and in general boring storyline.

I did like the solo scenarios given on the isle of thunder, but that's about it. The 3 man SCs are IMO a waste of resources UNLESS they -actually- provide decent and worthwhile loot.

Because currently, the loot bags you get from the normal SCs have a "chance" of giving ilvl 463 loot while HC scenarios also have a "chance" (Haven't gotten a single item from HC scenarios on my freaking mage).

So yeah, unless they make scenarios actually worthwhile I won't be running them.

This. I have never wiped in a heroic scenario. I have never died in a heroic scenario. I have never for a second cared or needed to know about any mechanics contained within a heroic scenario, other than the eternal, glorious "do not stand in magical, immersion-breaking red circles which somehow appear far in advance of the actual fire".

I'd like for Heroic Scenarios to be AT LEAST one of two things, preferably both.

1) Interesting storytelling mechanisms, not just random mumbo-jumbo for the sake of having a heroic scenario, i.e Unga Ingoo. Ooked in the dook, bro. Something that's interesting, at LEAST the first time you do it. If they never hold any particular relevance to the story, and don't really mean anything, and don't make sense, why on earth would you waste development time on them?

2) A challenge. I don't know at exactly what point "heroic" became another way of saying "bereft of challenge", or "impossible to wipe", or "slightly more difficult than non-heroic in that you actually sometimes are taken below 95% health if you're in greens", but it's getting a little old. If they're a "heroic" variation of a "non-heroic" scenario, put some challenge in them.

And, if your goal is to allow any 3 random people of any archetype, you could at least tune the numbers to punish awful play, just to make them less of a snooze-fest, and give a sense of accomplishment to completing them.

I can't really think of anyone in the entire world (of Warcraft) who's finished a heroic scenario and thought to themselves, "Whew! What a close scenario! I was quite excited! I feel very.. very heroic!" It just doesn't happen.

So, any combination of those two points and I'd dislike them a little less.

Oh, and for the love of all that's holy, don't make them the fastest way to gain valor, then turn around and say, "Well! These scenarios are an overwhelming success! People must love them, since they're using them constantly to get valor capped because they're easily the fastest method of doing so! We must include more!"

[Krazzorx]

Too hard for me to tell. I out gear them by so much and aren't intended for me, even at launch.

Also, the 3 man scenarios we had at launch were awful for story telling. All the stories were about as important as the quest text 90% of us skip the first play through. All the Alliance scenarios were nearly impossible to tell the over arcing story being told. Horde scenarios' stories actually were pretty good for story telling.