That it?

100 Human Paladin
13000
Seriously? I don't get comments like this at all.

Why does the arbitrary number of HOW MANY bosses are in an instance matter instead of how good those boss encounters are?

Do you honestly remember EVERY SINGLE boss in AQ40? That instance had a ton of encounters in it but only a few are memorable.

Do you honestly want them to up the number of bosses in the instance to 11 (lol it goes to 11), just so we can have more boss fights like Auriyaya?

Judge them on the quality of the boss encounters. The number doesn't matter. I'd rather have an instance of seven bosses on the level of detail as Mimiron, Lich King or Yog-Saron vs TOC any day.


To an extent, quality matters over quantity, yes. When the available quantity is so low it is cleared in a single night a week however, guild and player interest will quickly nosedive off a cliff.

And RE: AQ40, that was actually one of the busiest times in WoW raiding history, as BWL, and MC were both still important to run each week. (MC had Thunderfury, and T2 pants, etc.) If I were to point at a time in WoW history that -did- ask too much time of raiders, that would be it.


I raided during that era. I was playing the game for hours and hours a week, I even remember that being the time when my PvP grind to rank 10 was also at its peak. I'd go to school until the early afternoon and since I was a senior I'd race home around noon, jump into AB for hours until raid started, raid for 4-5 hours and then PvP some more.

I was playing the game for hours and hours. But I can safely say looking back in hindsight. I wasn't having fun. The game has evolved so much since then, and the same things that kept me occupied back then wouldn't fly today. The bosses were too simple, too generic. They had like 1-2 mechanics you had to watch for and that was it. The only real difficult part of raiding in those days was coordinating 40 people.

Think if boss fights were still designed that way? The raid dungeons used the same tilesets as areas already around the world, the bosses had the same models as mobs we already fought in the world.

They could churn a raid like that out every month if that's what we wanted. But that's NOT what we want. We as players have developed a taste for so much more than that. Some just won't acknowledge it.

The shift to 25s and 10's changed all that. With only 10 people the boss fights NEED to be complex in order to be challenging or fun, as a result they take much longer to develop.

I'm for that philosophy.
Edited by Vindicare on 4/28/2011 10:01 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Warrior
14765
04/28/2011 09:44 PMPosted by Ophidon
There has been much talk about ToC, yes, but I have seen none of it that is positive?.. And the fear that they are indeed repeating that (not necessarily in 'quality', but in quantity it will be even -lower-, because of the shared 10/25m lockouts/loot). This could quite well be the biggest make or break point for the future of WoW raiding, ToC was put up with once, because it was assumed to be a mistake they learned from. If they repeat it, it wont exactly be pretty.


No matter what, it isn't ToC. It's still 2 more bosses. Moreover, it's a zone the size of Alterac Valley (vs. 2 rooms) with each boss having one OR MORE new unique model (vs. every single model being old, except I think Anub's textures were different) with 10 gear set models (vs. 8).
Reply Quote
90 Dwarf Paladin
11700
Does anyone else find it funny that alot of people apparently thought Blizzard has been doing everything wrong since Ulduar, but those people have still been paying for the game that is apparently terrible?
Reply Quote
85 Draenei Shaman
3715
No matter what, it isn't ToC. It's still 2 more bosses. Moreover, it's a zone the size of Alterac Valley (vs. 2 rooms) with each boss having one OR MORE new unique model (vs. every single model being old, except I think Anub's textures were different) with 10 gear set models (vs. 8).


True, except it's just one more boss, not two. :( There are only 6 in Firelands, the 7th boss is the new BH boss. That one doesn't exactly count in my book, and if it did, then ToC was also a 6 boss patch itself, so it'd still be a one boss difference.
Reply Quote
43 Night Elf Hunter
11020
I'm sorry but 7 bosses is not ideal for raiders. Did you not learn from TOC? Heck, atleast TOC allowed you to do 10 and 25 mans which totaled 10 bosses for the week.

Sugarcoat it all you want, 7 bosses is still 7. Ulduar had 14 and was amazing. I don't remember anyone complaining about that.


Yeah, I mean that's a tough situation because our feeling is simply that people shouldn't be forced to play the game more than a couple nights a week to keep up on progression. We realize though that some people legitimately like playing every night, and having real reasons to be in the game and playing with raid groups and such. There's obviously things like alts, professions, achievements, PvP, to keep people busy, but it's ultimately something we'd like to get a better handle on. Having content that isn't forcing people to log in every night, but still offering something that's meaningful for those that do. Understand though that by definition those types of things can't lead to player power or else everyone will be back to having to log on every single night to keep pace. Anyway, it's something we very much want to get a better handle on, but it's not something we're going to solve easily.



Why did anyone ever HAVE to log on every night and why did everyone HAVE to keep up with everyone else? What's wrong with letting the people decide for themselves how often they want to play WoW? If a person wants to do both 10 and 25 man versions of a raid every week don't penalize that person because someone else doesn't want to raid as often. If a person only plays once or twice a week of course they may end up a little behind the person who plays 4-5 nights a week but that's life. I guess my frustration is that if you're only going to let us run 10 or 25 man content weekly and not both then we're kind of expecting you to provide us with something else to do with the time we used to spend doing these other raids that we can't do any more.
Reply Quote
28 Dwarf Priest
12275
04/28/2011 09:18 PMPosted by Bashiok
Given 2.1(which was WoW at it's peak for being worked on), being released in four months with two complete raids, three questing areas/daily sets.


Those instances and daily areas were originally intended to release with Burning Crusade, so yeah, while they were put on hold when we realized they wouldn't be done in time they didn't take too much time to finish off. That's sort of my point, you're thinking patch release to patch release and really there's work being done far in advance (or even at the same time), and content being shifted or even cut as we revise our schedule. Looking back at Cataclysm release, we probably should have held some stuff back, which would have created a situation not too unlike 2.1.


I'm curious wether it was by design or by a fortunate last minute alteration of deadlines that you have 2 kinda different types of large patches coming out relatively close together. By different, I mean 4.1 - aside from the Troll dungeon reworks - seemed focused on class mechanics and UI and games systems. 4.2, on the other hand and as far as I can tell, is pushing out lots of art content - raid, quest zones and lots of quest related activity.

This actually would seem to be a useful way of doing things. It must be very tricky to tune a boss fight while at the same you are making major changes to a class mechanic and so on.
Is this perhaps a way you might roll out patches in futures? More patches but with sharper focii?

Meanwhile I keep holding out for the "upgraded Weather" patch sometime in the future. 1.10 (I think was when weather was introduced) was my favorite memory of a patch. :)
Reply Quote
92 Undead Priest
15875
Yes, Firelands is the raid in 4.2, and 7 is the total number of bosses.

We think 7 is our current ideal for number of bosses in a raid. (We launched Cataclysm with two full raids of 4-6 bosses each.)


How is 7 the ideal amount?

The best Tier of content you've ever done had 14 (In ULD). The worst had 5 (ToC).

Why do you think 7 will be ideal? Unless you make 7 normal and 7 unique hard modes, 7 will be boring and repetitive. ToC was the worst Tier ever because of how repetitive it was. Everyone said the same thing about it before you released it and you said the exact same thing you are saying now about firelands. In the end it does not matter how amazing Firelands is because with only 7 bosses and a VERY LONG WAIT until the next tier... people will just get bored.

You guys mention sunwell as something people look back on fondly... It was an end of an expensaion content patch that NO ONE RAN. Something like 0.5% of raiders ran it before 3.0

It doesn't matter how amazing Firelands is. Why? Because most guilds will have normal modes on farm in a matter of <2 months and will be waiting another ~5 months for the next tier of content. THIS IS BORING.

In WotLK you had 17 Fights in the first tier. 12 in the second. 6 in the 3rd and 13 in the final tier. And on top of that you could run both 10 and 25man content to make content seem to last longer.

In TBC, you had 16 in Kara + 3 from Gruul/Mag. You had 10 in T5 + 6 from ZA. 14 in T6. 3 world bosses and 6 to finish up the tier (when most people were still working on T6).

Honestly, how do you look back on these past successes and imaginate that 7 bosses for endless months is ideal? Please answer this... Because I do not think you can without spouting some PR lies about how it is ideal when we all know it will not be. Please don't do this Blizzard. As a GM of now 3.5 years, I've never seen it as bad as it is now as it has ever been in ~6 years of WoW. You are failing your game. Your content is stale and boring. 4.1 Was a complete joke and all we have left to look forward too is yet another limited and boring patch. I AM NOT EXCITED.
Reply Quote
Community Manager
04/28/2011 10:11 PMPosted by Ophidon
True, except it's just one more boss, not two. :( There are only 6 in Firelands, the 7th boss is the new BH boss.


Incorrect. 6 + Rag.
Reply Quote
43 Night Elf Hunter
11020
I love the people who keep chiming in about TOC.

Don't you people get it? TOC was a failure. Ulduar was more fun in every conceivable way and with the introduction of TOC Ulduar died.


I disagree. While I don't want every raid to be a simple single room encounter like ToC was I don't need every raid to be a spiraling dungeon like Ulduar either. It was just right for a raid added in between two other larger and more elaborate content patches. ToC was fun and it fit in well IMO. It was challenging but not brutal. It actually was the perfect pug raid which I think there needs to be more of in Cataclysm. There were also hard modes for those who like more of a challenge. The only criticism that I agree with about ToC however was that releasing it when they did instantly made Ulduar obsolete.

Oh and Ulduar was not for fun in every conceivable way. It had a vehicle fight. ;)
Edited by Jawaka on 4/28/2011 10:44 PM PDT
Reply Quote
85 Draenei Shaman
3715
04/28/2011 10:38 PMPosted by Bashiok
Incorrect. 6 + Rag.


Well that's some moderately good news, at least. It contradicts the first post of the thread, thus my confusion. :/
Reply Quote
91 Draenei Death Knight
11505

There has been much talk about ToC, yes, but I have seen none of it that is positive?.. And the fear that they are indeed repeating that (not necessarily in 'quality', but in quantity it will be even -lower-, because of the shared 10/25m lockouts/loot). This could quite well be the biggest make or break point for the future of WoW raiding, ToC was put up with once, because it was assumed to be a mistake they learned from. If they repeat it, it wont exactly be pretty.


Well the problems with ToC were multi-faceted, so it's really difficult to directly compare to what we already know about Firelands. The fights in ToC are actually some of the more memorable in Wrath. However it was over way too soon. Each week after it came out you'd go in and probably be finished with progression within a few attempts. The only fight that could ever truly stymie pugs was Anub'arak. Then the step up from normal Anub to heroic Beasts was so huge that unless you already had a full raid of players capable of doing heroic raids, you were done with progression.

With the initial Cataclysm raids, I have to give them a lot of credit for the progression difficulty curve feeling just right. It slowly ramps up, then the jump from normal Nef to heroic Halfus is not large. I'd imagine we would have felt a lot differently about ToC if it has a similarly designed curve.
Reply Quote
100 Goblin Priest
11485
04/28/2011 09:24 PMPosted by Bashiok


So much this. Like honestly why are they pouring resources into remaking the character panel? The game isn't any more fun or any prettier looking as a result.


As much as we would love for every employee to be a master artist, programmer, modeler, animator, composer, etc. etc. individual people have individual crafts. While potentially hilarious, you wouldn't want the UI designers to be crafting raid bosses.


After some consideration, yes, I want this. It would be hilarious.
Reply Quote
1 Night Elf Hunter
0
The best Tier of content you've ever done had 14 (In ULD). The worst had 5 (ToC).

This is opinion, not fact. Although I do agree.

Why do you think 7 will be ideal? Unless you make 7 normal and 7 unique hard modes, 7 will be boring and repetitive. ToC was the worst Tier ever because of how repetitive it was. Everyone said the same thing about it before you released it and you said the exact same thing you are saying now about firelands. In the end it does not matter how amazing Firelands is because with only 7 bosses and a VERY LONG WAIT until the next tier... people will just get bored.


As opposed to 13 bosses and burn-out begins to happen. ToC was terrible because it was a giant loot pinata with a grand total of one difficult boss; H Anub. It was similar to ICC after the buff came out, a bunch of easy bosses on farm while banging your head against H LK for months.


It doesn't matter how amazing Firelands is. Why? Because most guilds will have normal modes on farm in a matter of <2 months and will be waiting another ~5 months for the next tier of content. THIS IS BORING.


Most guilds haven't cleared the current tier on normal yet and it's been 5 months. Maybe you should try more than H Halfus if you're that bored of this game?

You guys mention sunwell as something people look back on fondly... It was an end of an expensaion content patch that NO ONE RAN. Something like 0.5% of raiders ran it before 3.0


0.5% cleared it sure. 0.5% ran it? Yeah, no.

It doesn't matter how amazing Firelands is. Why? Because most guilds will have normal modes on farm in a matter of <2 months and will be waiting another ~5 months for the next tier of content. THIS IS BORING.


Yes, I'm sure the majority of guilds will have normal modes on farm in under 2 months when we're 5 months in and the majority of guilds haven't cleared this tier on normal yet.


In WotLK you had 17 Fights in the first tier. 12 in the second. 6 in the 3rd and 13 in the final tier. And on top of that you could run both 10 and 25man content to make content seem to last longer.[/quote

The first tier was a push-over where pugs could clear everything except Sarth3D. Ulduar was amazing. ToC was boring with one boss being difficult and the rest being push overs. ICC was awful after the buff came out, and how did you enjoy running both 10 and 25 every week in order to keep up with gear? It felt like a chore to run both every single tier and it caused huge amounts of burn-out when you had to run it on more than just your main.

[quote]In TBC, you had 16 in Kara + 3 from Gruul/Mag. You had 10 in T5 + 6 from ZA. 14 in T6. 3 world bosses and 6 to finish up the tier (when most people were still working on T6).


This would be the equivalent of T5 in TBC. T5 was AWFUL. Who cares how many bosses it had when most people weren't seeing it progressively due to attunements anyway. I remember, personally, being in 6 guilds which all fell apart due to T5. People would get bored or quit, then you'd have to attune more people, have them learn your strategy for the fight, some would fail it, get more people, attune them. It was an absolute nightmare. The next tier could have 2 bosses and it would be an improvement on progressive T5.

Honestly, how do you look back on these past successes and imaginate that 7 bosses for endless months is ideal? Please answer this... Because I do not think you can without spouting some PR lies about how it is ideal when we all know it will not be. Please don't do this Blizzard. As a GM of now 3.5 years, I've never seen it as bad as it is now as it has ever been in ~6 years of WoW. You are failing your game. Your content is stale and boring. 4.1 Was a complete joke and all we have left to look forward too is yet another limited and boring patch. I AM NOT EXCITED.


Why should they care if you're not excited? Many people are. You are choosing not to run hard modes since they're so similar to regulars despite having 12+ kills on basically all of the normal mode bosses. If they're so similar, why would you not chase after the better gear? Afterall, you should clear them in almost the same amount of time right? Many people who are still pushing hard modes and people who are 12 or 13/13 are looking forward to this next patch. This tier was long and tedious, if you wanted to push for world firsts, it took a ridiculous amount of effort as compared to previous bosses. A shorter tier will be a breather.
Reply Quote
85 Blood Elf Paladin
1560
I think this largest problem is the timing from Cata release to the next dungeon, for a large amount of people 4.1 didn't help them much. I say this from this point, anyone who had been able to raid before 4.1 and get anywhere. Not even 12/12 most likely at this point will not need the increased valor points or the 353 gear from Z'A and Z'G. I don't dislike either dungeon, but they are dungeons not raids and for people who raid that means this patch is little more then the last minor patch with its adjustments to classes, with some cute UI changes.

So overall lets say it will be another 5-6 months till 4.2 comes out using the time table on 4.1. That puts it at October or November which is getting close to a year for new raid content after the first release. So in all we will end up waiting a year nearly for content which has less bosses then a number of other patches in the past, also you say 7 bosses, but as of now, when most people count or consider what bosses people have cleared they do some out of 12, and not 13 and thus don't count BH boss.
Reply Quote
85 Undead Death Knight
12265
As a raid leader of a progression raiding guild I share the disappointment of the community that Firelands will only have 7 bosses, and that there will be no additional raid content as most people expected. This is just not enough content for patch 4.2 however you want to spin it Blizzard.

I recall watching the Dungeons and Raids panel at the 2009 Blizzcon where Cory Stockton and Scott Mercer admitted that Wrath's raiding content schedule could have been done a lot better, and that for Cataclysm there would be far more raiding content at launch and subsequent updates.

What happened to the plan to have 4 raids at ship: Grim Batol/Skywall/The Firelands/Blackwing Descent? And what happened to the plan to have multiple smaller dungeons instead of one massive dungeon as had been done in Wrath?

With the outlook for a more competitive MMO scene this year, with Rift already out, and Star Wars The Old Republic, and Guild Wars 2 coming out, you really need to kick the raid content production into high gear guys, or you will have a lot of bored and burnt out raiders looking for greener pastures if you keep going as you are.

The raiding community was told that in Cataclysm that we'd have more content with quicker patches, yet you have not lived up to these promises. That is why a lot of people are disappointed.
Edited by Koros on 4/28/2011 11:30 PM PDT
Reply Quote
85 Human Paladin
8635
What I'd like to know is why the decision has held that every new tier of content obliterates the need for the previous tier? What I mean by this is that ilvl leaps so high that there becomes no point in doing anything except the current tier. This wasn't the case until Wrath. Now, I completely understand the need to have valor points and justice points as it is a huge help in gearing up new guildies or alts so you can progress without having to do what you did in BC which was carry people though every raid to try and gear them asap so they can be viable in t6 content.

What I do not understand is why, for example, 239 heroics in Ulduar are followed by 245 normals in ToC. Or 258 to 264, etc. Why not just have heroic progression of ilvl and normal progression be different? i.e. - 359 to 372 normals and 372 to 385 heroic. Then you still do the VP and JP switch like you plan. Am I missing something? Is this harder to tune fights for? The hardcores don't care if normal modes are a breeze because they are for them anyway. Likewise, the casuals don't care if heroics are too hard because they are for them anyway. So by doing the ilvls this way you just make it so previous tier heroics are viable for gear ALSO. It's more content! JP would just give 359 in 4.2 (13 ilvl's below normal mode drops just like JP currently!) And VP would give the equivalent of normal mode drops, just like currently.

I suppose the argument is that people are tired of the old tier and don't want to be FORCED to run it again. But if you really think about it, the people who have that on farm wouldn't need to do it. If your raid group is decked out in 372, then you're ready for firelands and firelands alone. If you're a casual guild, maybe only a few heroics in, then that's new content for you! You can work on firelands AND previous tier heroics. And again, nobody is being forced to do anything in this model. It's just extra! They can raid 1 night a week on firelands' 7 bosses or they can do that AND the old heroics.

If someone sees the flaw in the logic here, please let me know.
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Warlock
12375
04/28/2011 11:17 PMPosted by Thearalyn
Most guilds haven't cleared the current tier on normal yet and it's been 5 months. Maybe you should try more than H Halfus if you're that bored of this game?


Actually, according to WoWprogress (the most accurate site we have that I know of) more people have downed reg Nef than defeated Yogg or LK25 before the release of the next tier.

Is everyone 13/13? No, but everyone shouldn't be 13/13 before the next tier comes out. Nobody was complaining in Wrath that ICC came out soon because only 5% of guilds had downed H Anub 25, why should H Nef or Sinestra be the barometer for progression now?
Reply Quote
14 Tauren Warrior
60
i think tier 4 was the best. there was maulgar+gruul, mag, and all of kara (which was substantial, and also very atmospheric/fun)


wtb upside-down kara with a few new bosses but similar theme, for a side-tier 12
Edited by Bloodpuke on 4/28/2011 11:39 PM PDT
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]