Should flex mythic raiding exist in DF?

[GreenJesus]

There's no way anybody other than the extremely casual playerbase would be happy with 10M Mythic balance in a game with 38 specs and classes. "Fuck em" is an exceptionally bad take when you consider how important the exposure from the RWF is.

Do you want mythic difficulty to keep getting supported? Why should blizzard do that when less and less people bother. Lockouts + server only + 20 people only roster + recruiting + running back to each boss + 30 minutes of trash between bosses + food on each pull + needing a warlock for summons + 2 potions per pull, etc. are just making more and more people quit mythic raiding. Why bother with all this bullshit?

At least make it easier for 10-15 man heroic guilds to try the first few bosses and wet their toes. As it stands right now, heroic people simply can't even try mythic due to the barrier to entry and that is a big mistake.

[Kaykay]

Alot of people claim that mythic has been better since the removal of 10 man mythic.
But looking at the guilds/players competing in the mythic scene, this is just straight wrong.

There's barely any raiders left. And bringing back flex/10 man, would revitalize the game.

Not only would flex mythic bring in more mythic raiders, more normal/heroic guilds would start showing up.
A lot of people stay away entirely from raiding, because they know they cant harvest the best rewards, and their time is better spent running m+ or pvp, than farming obsolete normal/hc gear and learning mechanics to bosses they'll never see in mythic.

[Depakote]

Mythic everything should be removed. It adds absolutely nothing to the game.

[Relapses]

Do you want mythic difficulty to keep getting supported? Why should blizzard do that when less and less people bother. Lockouts + server only + 20 people only roster + recruiting + running back to each boss + 30 minutes of trash between bosses + food on each pull + needing a warlock for summons + 2 potions per pull, etc. are just making more and more people quit mythic raiding. Why bother with all this bullshit?

At least make it easier for 10-15 man heroic guilds to try the first few bosses and wet their toes. As it stands right now, heroic people simply can't even try mythic due to the barrier to entry and that is a big mistake.

There's a pretty easy way for Heroic guilds to become Mythic guilds: Get gud.

[Razorice]

The issue I ran into in the past few years is that late night guilds seems to be dying. It's very hard to find people and upkeep 20 people throughout the expansion who ca raid after let's say 11pm RT. Maybe that's just my bad experience, so it's not always about "git gud" or find a guild, sometimes you want to raid, but your schedule allows for shitty raid hours which a lot of people don't raid in.

[Jujudrood]

Here is the thing though - who gives a shit?
It literally doesnt matter. People have always gone trough different hoops to optimise for world of warcraft and for most of us it never really mattered in the end anyway.

1 person slightly changing their attitude/understanding of a fight when you overgear it like my segment does - matters far more then being 10 or 14 peoples in a flex raiding size.

When flex first became a thing in pandaria everyone was minmaxing it the group sizes. Now that flex is a thing in both normal and hc noone gives a shit. I can honestly say that we havent given it a single thought this entire expansion.

Anyone who raids mythic should give a shit.
Normal and Heroic are night and day easier than Mythic because of the flex system.
You can't tune as tightly when the number of bodies ranges from 10-30; it's statistically impossible to make it that tight.
When you have 20, you know the group will have X tanks, Y heals, and Z DPS, with maybe a +/- 1 heals/dps here and there.
That's a small variance that can be accounted for and tuning can be tighter.
Widen the variance from 10 to 30 people, and that tuning goes out the window for "generic person sliders" like they do in Normal/Heroic.
Not only that, but mechanics will get watered down because you no longer have a 20 person expectancy, so some of the design has to be more generic to accommodate a smaller or larger group, and not just numbers-wise but also area of effect, speed at which things happen, and similar.

Flex Mythic, it will get watered down and be much easier than it is today.
Maybe that's what people want; an overall easier to access/complete "true endgame".
But if that's the case, just get rid of Mythic altogether and have Heroic be the top.

This is why my suggestion would be to just open cross-realm and cross-faction Mythic raiding earlier.
I would do it day 1, but I also couldn't give less of a shit about the world first nonsense or anyone who participates in it.
Open cross functionality and the pool of people increases, which will generally increase the ability for someone to participate in it.
If people truly want to be challenged and think they are up to snuff, they will find a group and maybe the stars align and they raid with them.
Otherwise, ditch Mythic altogether and make wow a truly "friends and family" alternative to the hardcore gaming scene.

[bullseyed]

As a member of a AoTC guild I feel like our guild is slowly dying with each patch due to the lack of content and rewards there is from raiding atm.

There's no incentive to do HC for gear due to M+, and after getting the achievement we have no reason to go back. This leads to people taking a break and/or quitting the game. And when the next raid patch comes out, we have to try to recruit good people once again and so on, making it a part-time job to maintain the roster.

AotC guilds are populated with several subgroups:
1. Players who are pretty bad at the game, and AotC is a tier-long challenge
2. Players who see the "play for a month, get AotC, take break until next tier" as a feature; it is their preferred experience
3. Players who should be in mythic guilds but are uninformed/too socially inept/too lazy to navigate applying to mythic guilds


Sounds like you're in group 3, which means it is time to gquit and join a big boy guild.

- - - Updated - - -

The reasons why people can't do 20 man isn't always neccessarily related to recruitment and the pool of players to choose from. Some prefer not to play with larger groups.

Cool. There are different games for that.

[NineSpine]

You're not illiterate so it can't be reading comprehension.

Which means you must be DELIBERATELY deflecting back to a point that isn't and was never at stake.

Let me help you out by re-stating what was said:

I said, from the start, that this wasn't about the thing with inflation. It was about you claiming that this happened "over and over and over and over again". This is a lie. I asked you to prove this. And all you did, over SEVERAL responses, was go back to the ONE term we disagreed over (inflation) - something I repeatedly said was NOT what I was talking about, and yet it's all you can ever bring up.

I suspect this is because you know there isn't anything else, and your bold-faced lie about what I supposedly did to you by quibbling over terminologies "over and over etc." is your way of distracting and deflecting from the fact that you made something up and got caught.

My offer still stands: prove your claim. Or just admit you made it up. Also works for me.

"There is no "proof" when I use a term, explain what I mean by it, and then you just keep telling me that that's not what I mean over and over and over and over again."

That's what I said. Did I say "You did this multiple times with multiple terms in this conversation?" No, I was referring to your repeated insistence that I was talking about something like economic inflation. That's what the "over and over" is, because you kept harping on it after I explained how I was using the term.

This is at least the third time in this "conversation" that you have went on some ridiculous tirade demanding proof for something I never said. It's embarrassing. Why do you act like this?

Which is not what I did. I said there's a difference between those two statements, I didn't say that you made either (nor that you made neither). I was very clear about what you said - you added the word "necessarily". The rest is illustration for why that is a problem, not a quote of your statement.

This is the only thing I"m going to respond to, because it is yet another demonstration of why it is a waste of time to talk to you. You compared two statements, one of which I NEVER SAID and used it as an argument against me? That's what you think an honest good faith discussion looks like?

I'm not entertaining you anymore. We are like 20 posts deep and you are still doing shit like obsessing over your (at this point I can only conclude intentional) mischaracterization of half sentences and phrases like "over and over", and then explaining how comparing things I never said to things I did say demonstrate I'm changing my argument.

I'm happy to provide comprehensive explanations of my arguments and why I believe they are correct, but only to people who demonstrate even a shred of good faith, not people who invent things I never said, intentionally mischaracterize everything I say, obsess over half sentences, litigate the meanings of terms I have already explained, and provide long winded Gish gallops that ignore arguments I made previously.

In this very post you provided a fucking 6000 word essay against the idea that we need to balance every difficulty evenly, which is not what I said, and a concept I already explicitly addressed in a previous post where I said we should balance for the middle because that will cascade into the best balance for the most players. Rather than addressing THAT point, you are off on some tangent about balancing for everyone and all kinds of other shit I never said.

The bottom line is that you are too up your own ass to bother having these discussions with. You don't have conversations. You talk AT people and make unreasonable demands of outrageous levels of evidence for simple, self-evident concepts that are perfectly reasonable for two people to just come to different conclusions about.

Let me make this simple: I am not going to spend 3 hours doing a bunch of research for someone who ignores what I say, puts words in my mouth, and makes me have to go back and litigate half sentences and term definitions. I am never going to do work to prove something to you, because you don't care what is true or right. You care about whatever weird thrill you get from acting this way.

Maybe we can START and move forward when you actually apologize for the way you have intentionally mischaracterized things I have said. Until then, I'm not doing one second of work to prove a god damn thing to you.

[bullseyed]

Despite what you might think, but there are plenty of guilds recruiting for Mythic for newer players that want to break into that content.

But none of those guilds will carry his toxic self! It isn't fair!

[Relapses]

The issue I ran into in the past few years is that late night guilds seems to be dying. It's very hard to find people and upkeep 20 people throughout the expansion who ca raid after let's say 11pm RT. Maybe that's just my bad experience, so it's not always about "git gud" or find a guild, sometimes you want to raid, but your schedule allows for shitty raid hours which a lot of people don't raid in.

You're not wrong; I myself am a bit of a night owl so I can definitely relate. The last time I raided our hours were 2:30a-6:30a, 4 nights a week. That was absolute fucking hell to recruit for. Personally, I've just disengaged with raiding altogether and mostly M+ push like a casual shitlord but I understand that's not always an option. I still think flex Mythic or a smaller raid size would be pretty toxic. They could maybe drop it to 15 but in a world where Blizzard seems to be moving away from class homogenization that seems like a recipe for disaster.

[Coldkil]

That doesnt change the barrier if entry to mythic raiding that many guilds have though ??

BUt changes the approach to it. As for M+, after 15s the partecipation plummets because only the people interested in it for then challenge and not the reward just stop there. Mythic raid will certanily drop in partecipation but people who stick to it will have people actually interested in that content type.

My issue with Mythic raids (and raids in general) si the lack of accessibility and replayability that M+ instead have. Let them go immediately xserver, remove the weekly lockout and so on. WHo cares if someone wants to run a raid 24/7 and then complain about nothing to do - i don't have a problem with it and it's just on its shoulders. And if people feels "forced" to do like it, well, they should just learn that they're playing the game for fun and not because tells them to. If they're not having fun they should just do something else.

- - - Updated - - -

I still think flex Mythic or a smaller raid size would be pretty toxic. They could maybe drop it to 15 but in a world where Blizzard seems to be moving away from class homogenization that seems like a recipe for disaster.

I agree with the most of this, but at this point imho Blizzard should just do what numbers and metrics are showing them - and if they want to. I am no one to tell them to make Mythic raids 10 man, but if it's what majority of people wants, they should listen to this if they want more partecipation in Mythic raids. Needs to be proven true though. The need to do what is best for the game to be fun and engaging for players (which isn't always what some people want).

Blizzard is in a strange situation where the core of the game is rock solid but has a lot of collateral troubles due to the immense attrition they created with the playerbase and the constant drop in players due to their refusal to listen to what players said. It doesn't mean they should adhere to a random angry forum poster that pulls ideas out of his ass, but from Legion onwards we have had a pretty consistent stream of complaints that most of the playerbase was agreeing on and Blizzard was either too slow with the changes or didn't even do anything about it. Cross faction is an emergency toggle because faction imbalance is simply a problem they havenever dealt with and never wanted to manage (though i'm really happy about that, now give me xfaction and xserver guilds plox).

I am really curious, especially after season 4, what changes are they planning for raid structure because we all know that it's a) in need of a revamp and b) needs to get on par with the more modern M+ system which is objectively really really good, like them or not.

[Biomega]

Did I say "You did this multiple times with multiple terms in this conversation?" No, I was referring to your repeated insistence that I was talking about something like economic inflation. That's what the "over and over" is, because you kept harping on it after I explained how I was using the term.

Which would make sense, had you not also used it as an excuse to not answer any of the other points I made.

You are being dishonest and evasive.

You compared two statements, one of which I NEVER SAID and used it as an argument against me? That's what you think an honest good faith discussion looks like?

If you don't understand what "I used this to show why the statement you DID make is a problem" means, then you are so severely deficient in the absolute basics of communication we have a much bigger problem here. It's the equivalent of me going "if you claim rainbows are red, that's like saying the sky is green" and you going "I cannot believe you're talking about the sky, which I never mentioned. Why are you going on about the sky I only ever said rainbows and now suddenly I'm talking about the sky? That's so dishonest".

I don't think that's the case. You know full well what I was saying, and how statements are used to illustrate points. But you also know that this completely deflates your position, so now you're once again pretending to be confused about a trivial bit of quotidian discourse so you can avoid having to actually PROVIDE EVIDENCE for your outlandish claims.

Good job, I guess. You've clearly demonstrated that all you want to do is spew your wild views, you're not actually interested in discussing them. Which, fair enough, many people are like that. You just want to be Angry Man Yells at Cloud. I can appreciate that, I just wish you'd been more honest about it from the start.

I'm happy to provide comprehensive explanations of my arguments

Sure you are, honey. That's why you've spent four posts complaining and ranting about all the reasons why you DON'T have to provide any explanation or proof. Totally makes sense.

You could just shut me up and humiliate me completely by providing actual evidence. That'd put me in my place. But nooo that's not worth your time is it.

This is the argumentative equivalent of "yeah of course I have a girlfriend, she just goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her, and I'd introduce you, but you wouldn't believe me anyway even if I did, so".

[GucciWarr]

The reasons why people can't do 20 man isn't always neccessarily related to recruitment and the pool of players to choose from. Some prefer not to play with larger groups, and some prefers play with larger than 20 man groups and not having to bench people. Giving people a larger pool to recruit from is probably gonna solve some things, but not everything. For my guild its not neccessarily about the pool of people we choose from. I'm sure we could find the extra x players we need to do mythic, but finding those people take time, and then maintaing the roster as people leave due to not getting a spot one night / bored of the game / whatever reason, is a part-time job. Sure, not everyone has this problem, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.



What do you mean by 'ruin mythic'? How would enabling other sizes than 20 ruin mythic (for you I assume)?
I mean, I clearly say that I don't think they should change 20 man Mythic. Just enable flex after some time, or let it be open at the side and be 'fake mythic' or whatever. Like whats the harm in that?
They don't need to increase the incentive to raid HC, its fine for what it is, the natural progression path is to go to the next difficutly, just as it is today for all guilds. The only thing restricting some guilds is that it requires a fixed number of players, making it more difficult for them to continue playing.

whatever you need to tell yourself to confirm you’re not crazy and most people only play in shitty heroic only guilds

[jeezusisacasual]

Already 40 points from KSM so my break starts 2 weeks after i reupped my sub, this is why mythic plus beats out raiding its literally treating a MMO like a PS5 game and moving on shortly after. This was with pugs mind you.

[NineSpine]

Which would make sense, had you not also used it as an excuse to not answer any of the other points I made.

You are being dishonest and evasive.

Yes, let's litigate your willful misinterpretation of something I said, even though I provided an explanation of what was meant. That sounds like fun to do for the fourth time.

If you don't understand what "I used this to show why the statement you DID make is a problem" means, then you are so severely deficient in the absolute basics of communication we have a much bigger problem here. It's the equivalent of me going "if you claim rainbows are red, that's like saying the sky is green" and you going "I cannot believe you're talking about the sky, which I never mentioned. Why are you going on about the sky I only ever said rainbows and now suddenly I'm talking about the sky? That's so dishonest".

I don't think that's the case. You know full well what I was saying, and how statements are used to illustrate points. But you also know that this completely deflates your position, so now you're once again pretending to be confused about a trivial bit of quotidian discourse so you can avoid having to actually PROVIDE EVIDENCE for your outlandish claims.

Good job, I guess. You've clearly demonstrated that all you want to do is spew your wild views, you're not actually interested in discussing them. Which, fair enough, many people are like that. You just want to be Angry Man Yells at Cloud. I can appreciate that, I just wish you'd been more honest about it from the start.

I'm glad that you have found a way to rationalize "If I compare something you never said to something you did say, it demonstrates that you changed your point" as some kind of brilliant insight.

Sure you are, honey. That's why you've spent four posts complaining and ranting about all the reasons why you DON'T have to provide any explanation or proof. Totally makes sense.

You could just shut me up and humiliate me completely by providing actual evidence. That'd put me in my place. But nooo that's not worth your time is it.

This is the argumentative equivalent of "yeah of course I have a girlfriend, she just goes to a different school, you wouldn't know her, and I'd introduce you, but you wouldn't believe me anyway even if I did, so".

If you believe that goading me is going to convince me to waste three hours writing a comprehensive explanation of things that are either self-evident or matters of opinion, after you've spent this much time trying to argue with me about definitions of terms, what half sentences mean out of context, how I should defend statements I never made, etc. you are very sorely mistaken.

I'm not going to give you whatever weird thrill you will get out of seeing me put a ton of effort in just so you can ignore it all and say "Why did you use the word 'because' this way?" and take us down another boring rabbit hole. Since tricking people into putting effort into arguing with you just so you can ignore it and play word games instead is clearly what gets you hard, let me offer some advice: Come out of the gate at least pretending to be honest and wait until they have put the effort in, THEN spring your sophistry and time-wasting on them.

[Biomega]

If you believe that goading me is going to convince me to waste three hours writing a comprehensive explanation of things that are either self-evident or matters of opinion, after you've spent this much time trying to argue with me about definitions of terms, what half sentences mean out of context, how I should defend statements I never made, etc. you are very sorely mistaken.

No, I literally SAID I don't expect you to ever provide any evidence for your claims, because that's not what you're interested in - you only want to MAKE statements, not substantiate or discuss them.

When I say you're never going to actually provide evidence, that's to be taken entirely at face value. I'm not trying to reverse-psychology you into actually doing it. Why would that even make sense, my position is very clearly that you HAVE no evidence, and aren't and never were interested in providing any in the first place.

Is that not abundantly obvious at this point?

[NineSpine]

No, I literally SAID I don't expect you to ever provide any evidence for your claims, because that's not what you're interested in - you only want to MAKE statements, not substantiate or discuss them.

When I tried to substantiate and discuss them you decided you wanted to ramble about what the term "inflation" means and whether my use of "because" was correct.

When I say you're never going to actually provide evidence, that's to be taken entirely at face value. I'm not trying to reverse-psychology you into actually doing it. Why would that even make sense, my position is very clearly that you HAVE no evidence, and aren't and never were interested in providing any in the first place.

Is that not abundantly obvious at this point?

You are requesting evidence for things that are either:

1. Self evident.
2. A matter of opinion, because the available evidence is fuzzy enough that it is reasonable to fall on either side of it.

It is absurd on its face to expect me to put hours of my free time into generating some kind of masters thesis on these issues, primarily because of the way you conduct yourself that shows very clearly how much you don't really care for anything but word games, sophistry, misdirection, straw men, and all sorts of other debate-lord horseshit that is not only silly but boring.

if you wanted to have a genuine conversation, you shouldn't have led with telling me what I meant by inflation and then litigating my use of the word "because".

[orgonutil]

flex after world 10 first is over would be good, but not between 10-30 ppl, could be 18-22 so you can have a roster of 20, dont miss the lockout if one or two doesnot apears and can have 2 extras not waiting in the bench for a long time

[Biomega]

You are requesting evidence for things that are either:

1. Self evident.
2. A matter of opinion, because the available evidence is fuzzy enough that it is reasonable to fall on either side of it.

That's a lie.

Plain and simple.

You can call whatever you like "self-evident", doesn't make it so.

Also, opinions and arguments aren't the same thing. If you just want to state a preference, go ahead. No one can argue with that, because it's not an argument. If you like lemon ice cream and don't like vanilla ice cream, there isn't really anything to discuss; but if you say something like "big ice cream is slowly eradicating lemon ice cream" that's not an opinion, that's an argument - and it needs substantiation and evidence, or it can and should be dismissed from the discourse.

If your point is simply "I don't like mythic difficulty, and I wish it wasn't there", then cool, so noted, moving on. If your point is "the game would be better off without mythic difficulty", though... then, well, FUCKING PROVE IT.

There really isn't much to discuss here, since you're clearly not interested in discussion. Proffer all the opinions you like, we'll read them and let you continue to have them. But if you make an argument, provide more than "it's just OBVIOUS right?" to back it up.

[NineSpine]

That's a lie.

Plain and simple.

You can call whatever you like "self-evident", doesn't make it so.

Also, opinions and arguments aren't the same thing. If you just want to state a preference, go ahead. No one can argue with that, because it's not an argument. If you like lemon ice cream and don't like vanilla ice cream, there isn't really anything to discuss; but if you say something like "big ice cream is slowly eradicating lemon ice cream" that's not an opinion, that's an argument - and it needs substantiation and evidence, or it can and should be dismissed from the discourse.

If your point is simply "I don't like mythic difficulty, and I wish it wasn't there", then cool, so noted, moving on. If your point is "the game would be better off without mythic difficulty", though... then, well, FUCKING PROVE IT.

There really isn't much to discuss here, since you're clearly not interested in discussion. Proffer all the opinions you like, we'll read them and let you continue to have them. But if you make an argument, provide more than "it's just OBVIOUS right?" to back it up.

Balancing mythic does not necessarily balance other levels of difficulty. That's self-evident, and you provided exhausted long winded garbage where you basically agreed but then took issue with things I never said, like that balance changes can never work cross-tier, and demanded I prove those things I never said.

How convincing an argument is, is a matter of opinion. This is what I mean when I accuse you of debate lord horseshit. There is no objective barometer for this. You believe that you are so incredibly brilliant, such a unique and logical mind, that if your OPINION is that an argument is convincing then it suddenly becomes an objective fact, but that's not how the real world works.

My background is in history. Do you think every historian agrees on everything in history? Do you think we just get together and everyone puts the evidence on the table and everyone agrees? No. In many cases, the evidence is fuzzy enough that reasonable people can come out on either side. I never claimed that my arguments are based on 100% rock solid, no questions, PROOF. I said I am reasonably convinced by slightly fuzzy evidence, and it very reasonable to disagree. This is a concept that clearly is inconceivable to you

Not only that but you are literally demanding proof for opinions like "The game would be better if..."