Flexible Raid Lock System in 4.0.1

[Craig_D36]

Will duel spec be 100g in the 4.0 patch?

[TheWaffler]

tl;dr version ?

I'm so sick if seeing people ask for "TL;DR" for things on the internet. The internet is mostly text, if you can't read it just... don't be on the internet.

[Eruptor]

Bunch of Bull-crap imho

[Sounder]

The system would be better if it allowed a player multiple kills of a boss per week, but only one loot *opportunity* per boss (regardless of 10/25) per week. That way a raid would be able to form of a group of players who want to play together, regardless of what bosses those players have killed earlier in the week. If you killed Marrowgar in a 10-man pug earlier, then in your 25-man raid you would be ineligible for Marrowgar25 loot (and gold and badges).

As it is now, our 25-man runs on Tuesdays and sometimes Sundays, if we can get enough people. Regardless of whether we're looking at ICC after 4.0.1, or raiding in Cata, it's hard to see asking people to stay out of 10-mans until a 2nd raid night that might not happen or might not make much progress.

[Deleted]

Nothing has really changed.

If you are 2/12 in 10 man and joined an 8/12 in 10 or 25 man, you would still be saved after defeating the 9th boss. You still cannot defeat the bosses you skipped for you will be locked to it as well. It's not like each boss have their own lockouts, right? I think most people here doesn't know how to read or don't have any reading comprehension ability.

The only thing that changed here is that
a) You won't get saved just by zoning in.
b) You can continue your progress by alternating 10 and 25 man runs.
c) You can still run Normal after being saved to a Heroic run.
d) You can join someone else's run as long as you are on the same boss or LOWER.

That's it. Stop complicating things noobs.

Nothing has really changed here, aside from the changes they made for cata (Both raid sizes have same lockouts, same loots, etc)

Fixed. Same boss or lower!! If you are saved to Sindragosa you cannot join a group that is still at Rotface.

[Deleted]

i'm curious to see what the LFM spam on trade will look like after this goes live... on my server the spam is so massive it looks like a movie credits played in fastfoward mode.
with that new system am I going to see the amount of spam multiplied by the amount of bosses downed by various groups?

[Deleted]

Jesus Christ, people call that a "wall of text"? Wtf is wrong with you? If you have trouble reading and understanding that rather well written text by an OFFICIAL PR PERSON FROM ONE OF THE BIGGEST GAME COMPANIES EVER, you are in deep shit. Seriously, go see a doctor and get your head checked......maybe they'll find that missing crayon after all.

[Deleted]

The system would be better if it allowed a player multiple kills of a boss per week, but only one loot *opportunity* per boss (regardless of 10/25) per week. That way a raid would be able to form of a group of players who want to play together, regardless of what bosses those players have killed earlier in the week. If you killed Marrowgar in a 10-man pug earlier, then in your 25-man raid you would be ineligible for Marrowgar25 loot (and gold and badges).

Loot Opportunities per boss don't work because you can have good team farm one boss over and over and over and "sell" the last spot to others. eg: imagine you had a guild that had cleared ICC many times over. With a loot once per boss you could setup a farm group to sell slots to farm for DBW or something. Keep killing same content over and over selling that last couple of slots. This is why loot once per boss would never work.

As it is now, our 25-man runs on Tuesdays and sometimes Sundays, if we can get enough people. Regardless of whether we're looking at ICC after 4.0.1, or raiding in Cata, it's hard to see asking people to stay out of 10-mans until a 2nd raid night that might not happen or might not make much progress.

However what you are forgetting is that if you fail to get 25 for 2nd night you can split into 2 10s and fill any slots with pugs as the lots of people will be available as you can get anyone who hasn't killed the boss you are on. Even if they have cleared several bosses in a raid they are NOT locked out of joining your raid if they haven't got as far as you.

So if you explain it to your guild even the really thick ones ought to see its a great change for guilds struggling for 25s numbers.

[Spoiledkid]

However what you are forgetting is that if you fail to get 25 for 2nd night you can split into 2 10s and fill any slots with pugs as the lots of people will be available as you can get anyone who hasn't killed the boss you are on. Even if they have cleared several bosses in a raid they are NOT locked out of joining your raid if they haven't got as far as you.

So if you explain it to your guild even the really thick ones ought to see its a great change for guilds struggling for 25s numbers.

But if that 25man raid kill HC bosses, you can't kill any HC bosses in 10man (if you are going to split the raid).

[Elica]

I find this new "design" lazy and short sighted. A better system would allow a saved player in a raid, but not let him receive loot from bosses that he's saved to. The design Blizzard has implemented has very limited flexibility, despite what it's being sold as.

With a loot once per boss you could setup a farm group to sell slots to farm for DBW or something.

I find that scenario highly unlikely. Once, MAYBE twice, they'd sell an item, but you can't convince me that an entire raidgroup would keep trucking an instance over and over again, without seeing ANY loot, just to sell some item to some random guy, an item which doesn't even have a guaranteed drop. Also, that guy better have some serious cash lying around to make it worth the time, especially since guilds already make enough gold from weekly raids.

[Ryme]

Oh I'm not a hardcore raider or anything, I'm just saying, it's been around for a year, the new expansion is right around the corner and if you haven't got what you wanted out of ICC by now you're pretty much SOL. Everyone has had more than enough time. All good things (or bad thing, depeding on who you ask) must come to an end.

Nope, we haven't, we're a splinter guild from a 25 man group that sucked. We haven't had enough time yet

[videotape]

I find this new "design" lazy and short sighted. A better system would allow a saved player in a raid, but not let him receive loot from bosses that he's saved to. The design Blizzard has implemented has very limited flexibility, despite what it's being sold as.

Speaking of short-sighted and lazy designs, the biggest and most glaring shortcoming of your proposed solution is that top guilds would just spend their free time selling loot to others every night once they've cleared the content for the week. It already happens to some extent, but the problem would be exacerbated by allowing anyone to kill any boss as many times as they wanted each week.

---------- Post added 2010-10-01 at 08:33 PM ----------

I find that scenario highly unlikely.

This is very selective reasoning on your part. Tons of gold is the only motivation many players need.

[Venius]

I am only confused about one thing at the moment, which after glancing through all the replies, I can not see a definitive answer.

You may also not join someone else's raid if they have defeated a Heroic encounter.

I am hoping this is just poorly worded on Blizzard's part, because if this is what they actually intend, this will only cause problems.

EXAMPLE: Your guild is doing a 25 man heroic raid. 30 guild members were interested in participating, but obviously only 25 can be in the raid at one given time. You are asked to sit out, and you are not saved to any raid ID or bosses. The raid kills the first boss on heroic. A raid member has to leave for whatever reason.
QUESTION: Are you able to join the raid to replace him, or are you shit-out-of-luck?

The way Blizzard has worded this phrase implies that once a raid has defeated an encounter on heroic, they would be required to have the exact same 25 people to continue, without being able to even swap in guild members who are not saved to anything. Again, I really hope that Blizzard just mis-worded this. Being required to use the exact same 25 people to complete an entire raid instance over the span of multiple days will cause massive headaches even for the most coordinated high end guilds. RL stuff happens, and there is almost certainly bound to be many instances where someone won't be able to have 100% attendance throughout the week. So what, the raid is expected to try and continue with only 24 people?

[nneo]

I am only confused about one thing at the moment, which after glancing through all the replies, I can not see a definitive answer.

You may also not join someone else's raid if they have defeated a Heroic encounter.

I am hoping this is just poorly worded on Blizzard's part, because if this is what they actually intend, this will only cause problems.

EXAMPLE: Your guild is doing a 25 man heroic raid. 30 guild members were interested in participating, but obviously only 25 can be in the raid at one given time. You are asked to sit out, and you are not saved to any raid ID or bosses. The raid kills the first boss on heroic. A raid member has to leave for whatever reason.
QUESTION: Are you able to join the raid to replace him, or are you shit-out-of-luck?

The way Blizzard has worded this phrase implies that once a raid has defeated an encounter on heroic, they would be required to have the exact same 25 people to continue, without being able to even swap in guild members who are not saved to anything. Again, I really hope that Blizzard just mis-worded this. Being required to use the exact same 25 people to complete an entire raid instance over the span of multiple days will cause massive headaches even for the most coordinated high end guilds. RL stuff happens, and there is almost certainly bound to be many instances where someone won't be able to have 100% attendance throughout the week. So what, the raid is expected to try and continue with only 24 people?

You can bring someone else into the group who isn't saved to the instance at all.

[Mem]

Okay. Here's my automatic problem with this idea from Blizzard:

WTF? People will break this into oblivion!

All I see is every raid having every buff and everyone having a soulstone on them! Because the way this is worded everyone could hop on their warlock alt, soulstone their 25-man buddy (before the boss pull), then back to their main, and it's lives x2 for the whole raid.

I remember this being broken before...RAID ID's were created for a reason Blizzard! If you have forgotten why, I just reminded you.

[Odexy]

Okay. Here's my automatic problem with this idea from Blizzard:

WTF? People will break this into oblivion!

All I see is every raid having every buff and everyone having a soulstone on them! Because the way this is worded everyone could hop on their warlock alt, soulstone their 25-man buddy (before the boss pull), then back to their main, and it's lives x2 for the whole raid.

I remember this being broken before...RAID ID's were created for a reason Blizzard! If you have forgotten why, I just reminded you.

I think the soulstone would go away once the lock in question logs off. But if that isn't the case, what exactly stops them from doing this already?

[skitzin]

While I understand the these changes are on the whole good I think implementing them in a raid where people are still requiring gear from both 10 and 25 man for their alts or whatnot is a bit dodgy.

[Rhunok]

So if I enjoy to raid both the entire 10man and 25man ICC the same week I will be punished because your implementing a change for PuGidiots who can´t clear more than 4/12 with the 30% buff? Complete and utter bullshit.

[Enderfish]

Here's what it comes down to. They're implementing a system that all raids in Cata have been built and itemized around, early. The problem with this is our current raids/loot/achievements were NOT built around this new system and therefor are being severely gimped. In cata, this will be great. 10 and 25 man raids will share loot and achievements and you won't have any reason to want to raid both versions, nor will you be able to. However in Wrath and ICC there are still two distinct loot tables and achievements/titles and by implementing this change early, they are effectively cutting out half of the raiding options in current content.

I get that they want to test out the system and get us used to it early, but it simply isn't a good idea because there are still a lot of raiders that want achievements/titles/loot from BOTH 10 and 25 ICC and will not be able to work on them both in the same week anymore. And seeing as there are only about 5 or 6 weeks left till Cata is released, that gives them 3 resets per instance to finish up the loose ends (vs the 6 resets we normally would have if able to do both versions each week). For me personally, I rarely do 10 mans but would like to finish up the 10 man achievements to get my drake but because I have a 25 man guild raid that does heroic bosses, I won't be able to do the remaining 10 man achievements unless I drop out of my guild's 25 man raid. I think overall, the positives of testing the system early, and getting players used to it are severely outweighed by the negative impact this will have on players in the 6 weeks leading up to Cata.

[Koriani]

Yes, if you enjoy to raid both 10 and 25 man in the same week because you're having fun - you won't be able to if either one is ahead or short of the other.

I have both, and the 25 man is made up of people who are both behind the 25 man in progress and ahead of the 25 man in progress. Both of those groups will be screwed in one or the other, depending on which is ahead.

If I run with the 25 man that week that is ahead of my 10 man, then my 10man is screwed out of progressing in their own content because I will be locking them out of earlier bosses they haven't gotten to yet (i.e. if the 25 man is on LK and the 10 man is on Blood Council)

Or if I run with a 10 man that is ahead of the 25 man, if any one person in the 10 man wants to come then it skips content for the 25 man. (the reverse...)

So all those 25 mans that are made up of people who do both, those people will now have to choose only one.

Personally I think this just screws over the people who do NOT raid for loot...and yes we do exist :P