The good side of Mythic 20man

Dungeons, Raids and Scenarios
Prev 1 19 20 21 26 Next

I don't agree with your observation of "25-man raiders gloating". I don't see a lot of gloating at the misfortune of 10-H guilds, frankly.

Here are a few of the posts that gave me that impression. For some reason, it's including the direct link to some of them but not others, even though the formating [quote="post#"] is identical.
Hey, i heard 10mans are dying wheres the party at, I will bring champagne.


I would like to take this time to tell every single person who is complaining about 20m Mythic raids to go !@#$ themselves. I was a part of a great 25m guild in LK that was torn asunder by the announcement of separate 10m and 25m lockouts. Every tear, every drop of blood that these %^-*!@# sacrificed in pursuit of their 10m raiding goals, they can all be cast to the side, and thank god for that. Know my pain...Know how it feels to have your entire social framework shattered and tossed to the side at the behest of Blizz as they redefine what it takes to be a progression guild. You're all $%^-ing pathetic....go QQ elsewhere and then wipe the *!@# off your diapers...



A percentage of players that still dwarfs the entire 25m raiding population.


They dwarf us, yet Blizzard cares about us more. Sorry to break your heart.



Do you know how many times 25's were told to suck it up that 25's were dying. I say this is 10 mans getting their just desserts.


11/10/2013 01:20 AMPosted by Thatius
I'm pumped and honestly I feel no remorse for the 10M raiding scene. That's what you get for copping out and being lazy.


11/09/2013 12:46 AMPosted by Evanijr
Honestly if you are worried your 10 man guild is going to die then tbh your guild isn't worth being a part of, the good guilds will recruit and live on the bad guilds will disband


11/09/2013 08:34 AMPosted by Furä
Once you all swallow your massive tears you'll learn to adapt


10M guilds starting heroics (who lets face it, are the ones really crying) are beginning to sound a lot like the LFR community, if not worse. If you want to raid for the ultimate challange, you will move on to mythic. If you want to raid in an intimate setting with your closest real life friends and their laptops/crappy computers... you will not.
11/13/2013 08:08 AMPosted by Ninjablaze
Well, my reasoning is that the loss of 1 person in 10 = 10% of the raid is dead. Loss of 1 person in 20 = 5% of the raid is dead.


But if 5% is enough to wipe you in a 25 man raid (and often times it is) whats the difference?


Except it isn't.
Mechanics have evolved so much further than HKM though. They wouldn't have that few mechanics in a fight.


This is true.

But if they view class oriented mechanics as the fun and special mechanics that they can add for Mythic, its pretty obvious what they think about the rest of them.
if its about a new challenging mechanics option then why not mythic 10 or mythic 25? Why does it have to be 20, and whats the advantage of mythic 20 to those that are blessed to make it happen?

Oh will i be so jelly of the items/vanity they will get vs poor ol' us who barely struggle with keeping solid 10 players and not to mention most which still have FPS issues in a simple 10 man raid.
Sometimes I think Blues posting in threads just fans the flames and makes it worse.

f its about a new challenging mechanics option then why not mythic 10 or mythic 25? Why does it have to be 20, and whats the advantage of mythic 20 to those that are blessed to make it happen?


I'm guessing so that every guild has to change, so they aren't playing favorites.

Oh will i be so jelly of the items/vanity they will get vs poor ol' us who barely struggle with keeping solid 10 players and not to mention most which still have FPS issues in a simple 10 man raid.


How is this even possible?
11/13/2013 08:19 AMPosted by Dijital
Sometimes I think Blues posting in threads just fans the flames and makes it worse.

Only sometimes?
11/13/2013 08:20 AMPosted by Adam
Sometimes I think Blues posting in threads just fans the flames and makes it worse.

Only sometimes?


Yeah, was being generous.
11/13/2013 08:02 AMPosted by Subrosian
It seems reasonable to ask Blizzard to continue to accommodate the preferences of both groups of people.


Blizzard threw away 5+ million subscribers and an entire expansion pack trying to cater two tiny-but-loud audiences: the "Pure 10s" and the "Finder Tool" crowd. They realized when they introduced Flex that the actual "Pure LFR" audience is tiny. They've come to the same conclusion with the "pure Heroic 10" audience.

They screwed up, big time, buying into the whines of people who want things smaller, easier and more convenient. They've already moved away from that this tier, and next expansion is, as I told everyone a year ago, the end of 10-man as you know it, and the gutting of the over-inflated LFR rewards.

It's frankly about time, makes zero sense for Blizzard to "accommodate" an audience that wants to bury the game alive just to make their personal play experience less challenging (and that is, frankly, what this is about). This whole 10 malarky started from people wanting guaranteed raid spots and gear.


Well said. I'd kiss you, but you're Alliance. So, /wave and grats on the racial buffs you're getting.
The good side? All the sides are good. Deeper encounter mechanics and fewer parallel versions of the same raid. People doing 10s now aren't doing it because they specifically love having 10 people, and are kidding themselves if they think their roster will be stable between now and then anyway.
or Priests using Mind Control on Instructor Razuvious


I don't know if this will be really relevant but, why is Mind Control a talent? Was it just stuck in the talent tree because of lack if ideals? I would rather have MC a shadow priest talent and another talent be put in it's place, such as a disorient or something or vice versa. It would make sense for it to be a shadow priest baseline spell since quite a few of our spells revolve around the "Mind" aspect. Psychic scream, Psychic horror, mind blast, mind spike, mindflay, etc. This would make us more valuable in the CC/survival department. The reason is that if I am going to get a healer away from an add that's trashing him/her. I hate having to lifegrip and THEN use mind control to get the add away and move it towards the tank, completely stopping my dps for about 10 seconds (which is about 1.3ml+ damage). It would be nice to have something I can cast CC without completely stopping my dps to babysit a bad healer/tank.

Edit: I know I have psychic scream and I can spec into voidtendrils, but the group I run with pugs people and on some add heavy fights I don't have enough to peel.
You should probably watch the actual presentation before spouting off comments. Blizzard explicitly stated types of encounters and example mechanics that would be possible in Mythic 20 that they wouldn't do in the current 10 / 25 environment.

Since those mechanics will be Mythic-only, the unified raid size enables them to be possible.


I did watch it and am very skeptical. Another poster basically hit the nail on the head- this decision was done because it makes top tier raiding content easier to balance which means Blizzard has to spend less time (read: money) fine-tuning it.

Fights already are constructed in such a way that their difficulty is greatly eased by having certain classes. My guild did the entirity of Heroic ToT without a prot paladin so I know this. Heroic LS is easier with a warlock. Fights like Galakras are easier with more cleave classes (like elemental shaman)

If I'm wrong I'll eat crow, but I'd wager that we're going to see largely the same encounter design
11/13/2013 08:21 AMPosted by Dijital

Only sometimes?


Yeah, was being generous.


Remember, when Blizzard posts in serious topics, its to draw attention to a subject. Those posts were nearly word for word what was said at Blizzcon. Having it in writing for everyone to see at the place where everyone who is worried will come, will ensure there is 0 confusion. Blizzard can take the heat, they take heat over so much, they're used to it. They prefer people being mad, especially for content months away, to being confused about what is going to happen and shocked when something happens they didn't expect.
I'd also call into question the statement of "It's easier to drop people than it is to recruit them." It's technically true, yes -- finding new raiders is harder than just not inviting the ones you have -- but totally ignores the fact that cutting people from your roster often means losing people you like. Which feels better: making new friends, or telling your current ones that they don't get to play with you any more? We're already asking a lot of many 25-player Heroic groups to cut 5 people.


This is a huge problem with the WoW community. Many would much rather just drop people than make new friends and give folks a chance.
11/12/2013 07:17 PMPosted by Lore
We chose to put Mythic at 20 largely for the function of raid design.


I get all the reasons why you feel you have to do this. However, my group of friends struggles to complete the 10 man roster now. Indeed, we have 7-8 consistent folks and occasionally 2-3 outside the guild that show up. Most often, my group ends up pugging the last 2 spots. Now, you're asking us to double the pain (if not 6x more - as we need to go from finding 2-3 people to finding 12-13) if we ever want to get to heroic/mythic modes.

I can't speak for my friends, but I do know that this was the last nail in the coffin, so to speak, for me. I will not be continuing into the next expansion. Once this one ends, so does my subscription. It is not a threat, just a mere reality of the choices - or lack of same - I have going forward.

I had a pretty interesting experience - more so when I switched from druid to rogue - when playing the game. Many bad raiding experiences (most as a druid). I abhor pvp and the annoying Pokemon system in the game. Crafting is 'meh'. But, in the end, I felt it generally worth the money most of the time. I no longer feel that way and am voting with my wallet. Tai Chi classes are looking more interesting by comparison and that's where I will go.

You may have chosen your numbers with great deliberation, but I do know this much for sure: It will lose people. With subscription numbers already 20% lower than they should be, this will not help. Good luck, you'll need it.
With subscription numbers already 20% lower than they should be, this will not help. Good luck, you'll need it.

It's always fun to see someone completely invalidate any point they could have had with one stupid point at the end. They'll need it? Subscriptions lower "than they should be"? It's adorable that you think you have any idea how this company works.
11/13/2013 08:38 AMPosted by Adam
With subscription numbers already 20% lower than they should be, this will not help. Good luck, you'll need it.

It's always fun to see someone completely invalidate any point they could have had with one stupid point at the end. They'll need it? Subscriptions lower "than they should be"? It's adorable that you think you have any idea how this company works.


If that is your method for invalidating arguments, you did a fine job of doing that to yourself. I don't need your validation either, so what's the point?
You may have chosen your numbers with great deliberation, but I do know this much for sure: It will lose people. With subscription numbers already 20% lower than they should be, this will not help. Good luck, you'll need it.


Uhh, people come back during an expansion, so the people who do quit, will probably even it out (actually the people coming back probably will outnumber the people who quit).

Also, what's "than they should be"? Is it just some magical number to validate your point?
*Raises Drink

To Blizzard, for making the hard decisions & the awesome changes coming in WoD.
11/13/2013 08:39 AMPosted by Angosia

It's always fun to see someone completely invalidate any point they could have had with one stupid point at the end. They'll need it? Subscriptions lower "than they should be"? It's adorable that you think you have any idea how this company works.


If that is your method for invalidating arguments, you did a fine job of doing that to yourself. I don't need your validation either, so what's the point?

Mostly the same as the reason you posted, except I'm under no false delusion that my opinion on any of this matters. You seem to think you have a clue and that people should care about your sob story of your bad guild not being able to recruit 2 people (seriously?). Why do you think that matters?
11/13/2013 08:02 AMPosted by Subrosian
It seems reasonable to ask Blizzard to continue to accommodate the preferences of both groups of people.


Blizzard threw away 5+ million subscribers and an entire expansion pack trying to cater two tiny-but-loud audiences: the "Pure 10s" and the "Finder Tool" crowd. They realized when they introduced Flex that the actual "Pure LFR" audience is tiny. They've come to the same conclusion with the "pure Heroic 10" audience.

They screwed up, big time, buying into the whines of people who want things smaller, easier and more convenient. They've already moved away from that this tier, and next expansion is, as I told everyone a year ago, the end of 10-man as you know it, and the gutting of the over-inflated LFR rewards.

It's frankly about time, makes zero sense for Blizzard to "accommodate" an audience that wants to bury the game alive just to make their personal play experience less challenging (and that is, frankly, what this is about). This whole 10 malarky started from people wanting guaranteed raid spots and gear.


You mean they threw away +5m when they tried to do what "Hardcores" suggested and make heroic 5-mans superhard.

Anytime Blizzard focused on the superduper-endgame raider, the more they lost.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum