Its been a bad year for non-raiders. [Archive] - Unofficial World of Warcraft Forums

oledurt

25-10-2006, 12:33 AM

With the news of no BC till 2007:

- No patch until at least late December, meaning at least 4 months from the last patch.
- No meaningful new PvE content for 7 months.
- No new battlegrounds for 16 months.
- No meaningful new non-raid PvE content for 21 months (10 months if you count tier 0.5 quests).

So, unless you're one of the lucky few who are raiding Naxx, the game hasn't changed much for you in 2006, and you can just look forward to more of the same for at least another 2 months.

I agree...my only true complaint about WoW was always the endgame "raid" I consider myself a hardcorp gamer, but I do have a day job. Doing the endgame raid content is very difficult if you have a life. They can take up to 8+ hours to complete an entire endgame raid. I have been in some of the higher level dungeons however I have never completed one with any guild I was a part of. I have played WoW since launch.

I suspect there are more players like me. WoW endgame will most defenitly improve once the level cap is raised. It will actually allow players like me access to my tier1 set. I think that the inclusion of things like basing rewards on things like rep is a good start however it is just the tip of the iceberg. Making the endgame dungeons more doable for a 5/10 man team really allows for the bulk of WoW's player base access to their higher lvl sets.
:afro:

Burntmeat

25-10-2006, 02:44 AM

I agree...my only true complaint about WoW was always the endgame "raid" I consider myself a hardcorp gamer, but I do have a day job. Doing the endgame raid content is very difficult if you have a life. They can take up to 8+ hours to complete an entire endgame raid. I have been in some of the higher level dungeons however I have never completed one with any guild I was a part of. I have played WoW since launch.

Nah not really... I do work myself too and i am in a raiding guild, its just a matter of finding the right one, and we dont raid 8 hours a night who could stand that?.

We have 3 nights max 4 hours of raiding a week and its perfecly possible to have a life, why is it always the non-raiders that claim you dont have a life if you raid?...

Were not the most cutting edge guild, but we do have cleared MC, BWL and in AQ40 curently up to Cthun + we downed Instructor Raz-whathisname and Anub-spiderthingie in Naxx... All that only raiding 3 nights a week. So its perfectly possible you just need a good guild.

Houdy

25-10-2006, 03:19 AM

How much time do you non-raiders play in a 7-day span?

teck21

25-10-2006, 04:19 AM

Burntmeat, 'its just a matter of finding the right one, and we dont raid 8 hours a night who could stand that?.

We have 3 nights max 4 hours of raiding a week and its perfecly possible to have a life, why is it always the non-raiders that claim you dont have a life if you raid?... '

For a lot of non-raiders, it's not just having the time. I know alot of non-raiders who actually play more hours a week than some raiders do.

It is often more the issue of timing than of time itself. Everyone's day job is different. I have got friends whose jobs require them to work till 11pm almost everyday, then there are days where they get can get off by 6pm. They find it extremely difficult to even make appointments to meet up with friends because of their work schedules, let alone set aside fixed times to raid even for 3 hours.

And that's just the job aspect. There's family, taking the kids out and so on. I don't even have their kind of crazy work schedule, and I have trouble making raid times, even on a weekend afternoon because I have to spend time with my wife and family.

Then let's say one actually finds a guild that even has raid times which occasionally fit in with our schedules. Let's face it, most guilds have 'core raiders', the ones who make most raids. And then there are the peoploe who can make one or more regular raids, even if they don't make all. But for any given raid, they might almost always be able to make it.

It becomes very difficult for a someone who is not able to make most raids, can only occasionally find time to make one raid, and not even at a regular schedule to get a spot on the raid. The less you go, the less you get to go. In the end, you don't get to go at all because no one knows who you are when it comes to raiding.

A guild that always has raid spots for someone who manages to make an irregular raid once every 2 weeks will practically not have enough people to raid properly, and if they do have the people, refer to the previous 2 paragraphs. :)

The truth is somewhere in between. It's not as hard to get a raiding guild as some 'casuals' imagine, but just as often, it's not as easy as some raiders make it either.

Quite often the people termed as casuals are anything but, because if they were truly 'casual', they probably wouldn't be on WoW forums of any kind. :)

That said, blizz really should put more content for non-raiders (I have always preferred to use this term rather than casuals). FOr people in raiding guilds, you can move from one raid instance to the next, each offering new challenges and more loot.

For people who don't get to raid, well, you pretty much reach the end of the road when you get your tier 0.5. And imagine the repetitive number of instances one has to run (with PUGs no less) just to get it all, 0 then 0.5.

Not to mention that even the epic 0.5 items are generally rubbish compared with even the purples of the 20 mans. IMO, they should make tier 0.5 harder and more challenging, but make the rewards even better, so that more people actually want to do it.

How many people have you seen running around in anything other than the first 3 items of 0.5? Compared to the people in raid epics, and 5-man loot?

Oops, too long!

teck

SLAKpOOper

25-10-2006, 04:45 AM

They dont brand a game MMORPG, to just play by yourselves.

If your not raiding the newer content, then theres only one person to blame...

Chelica

25-10-2006, 04:52 AM

They dont brand a game MMORPG, to just play by yourselves.

If your not raiding the newer content, then theres only one person to blame...

That is a bit extreme. They are not saying they want to play by themselves. The poster above is saying it would be great for TBC to come out because you can do the new 5 man dungeons casually and still stack up with nice gear.

Imraath

25-10-2006, 05:27 AM

Hrm... Is it just me who thinks that the truely epic items should be earned from truely epic battles? ie 40(+) man raids?

Chelica

25-10-2006, 05:29 AM

Sure, 40 man raids are fine, but not when you have to do it for 1 year straight just to be able to bid some points for it.

Kezi

25-10-2006, 05:34 AM

How much time do you non-raiders play in a 7-day span?

One reason I was looking forward to a Holiday '06 BC release. Everyone in my guild would be out of school/work and be able to bum around Hellfire's new digs in Outlands.

As to your question... I would say during college maybe eight to ten hours a week.

I was also looking forward to the "Save-point" thing in 5mans but either I read it wasnt going down or wasnt what we thought it would be.

Hrm... Is it just me who thinks that the truely epic items should be earned from truely epic battles? ie 40(+) man raids?

Thats fine! You guys earn them from putting up with weird guild leaders and having to learn fights ect...

Most of us just want more endgame PvE stuff like whats coming in BC! Plus you guys can still be raiding Naxx till Jan.... what do we do?

cyradis2003

25-10-2006, 06:23 AM

Thats fine! You guys earn them from putting up with weird guild leaders and having to learn fights ect...

Most of us just want more endgame PvE stuff like whats coming in BC! Plus you guys can still be raiding Naxx till Jan.... what do we do?

Keep running the UBRS, STrat, Scholo stuff and get in or start ZG pick ups when you know you have enough time. This way you are improving your gear to the point where getting those 5 man instances done in BC will be more enjoyable.

I mean you can do Scholo in straight crap gear but it is more fun if you have a few LBRS and BRD blues first to make it easier right?

You can also join a medium sized guild that does ZG, great loot in there and 20 man raids are easier to get going unscheduled.

PS - epic gear from epic battles sounds a bit elitist, I like the fact that you can earn epic gear through long questing - epic deeds also deserve epic rewards. What is really funny is that all that 40 man raid gear that some people on my server seem to think makes them akin to god is going to be outdated by level 63 blues .... I am laughing already.

Eastwood1427

25-10-2006, 09:46 AM

Hrm... Is it just me who thinks that the truely epic items should be earned from truely epic battles? ie 40(+) man raids?

Content doesn't equal epics. It never has, it never will. In fact, that has no bearing on this topic whatsoever as this isn't a gear-whine in any way, shape or form. The fact we're getting gear from five-man wings that makes your MC and BWL gear look like vendor trash is neither here nor there.

As for the idea "multiplayer = 40 man", again, I call bull. I don't enjoy raids, I never have, and some of my more memorable moments have been in the five-man instances. Indeed, the Dire Maul model is superior for those of us who don't like 40-man raids. That's the multiplayer that I signed up for, the instances that are accessible by anyone who happens to be level 60 as sitting in LFG to get another four guys isn't hard. At least, it's a walk in the park compared to getting another 39.

But saying that those of us who don't raid should just go do Scholo and that... No. Not buying that either. We've gotten the shaft for too bloody long, getting stuck with instances that have been in since the games release. There's a reason why some of us don't want to... Quite possibly because we're sick to death of them? Why do you think we want new content? We've done Scholo, Strat, Blackrock Spire and Dire Maul to death.

I've just never understood the aversion to new non-raid PVE content. Would a new quest-hub really hurt? Or would a new winged 5-man instance? I can't see how that would somehow hurt the game, like some raiders are quick to cry. Surely more content for everyone is a good thing? As opposed to just adding content for the minority? (Hello, Naxxramas...)

Kyusoath

25-10-2006, 11:06 AM

I suspect there are more players like me. WoW endgame will most defenitly improve once the level cap is raised. It will actually allow players like me access to my tier1 set. I think that the inclusion of things like basing rewards on things like rep is a good start however it is just the tip of the iceberg. Making the endgame dungeons more doable for a 5/10 man team really allows for the bulk of WoW's player base access to their higher lvl sets.
:afro:

yes i'm a player like you. i was a hardcore gamer, when i played SWG, i didn't have a job and did pretty much nothing else, when SWG died i came to wow but got a job around the same time. between work,sleep and my gf i can't commit the time needed, and never will be able to.

orginally wow looked like a game that took up less of your life and didn't require hardcore dedication to get something worthwhile done, which is true right upto level 60 where after a few months of being 60 your options for character devlopment dwindle, as all the content is raid based.

i still haven't got what i want from DM,Scholo and strat, but after running them over and over (and over again) its getting boring, and its not getting any easier, as i'm not gettign any new equipment.

so what do i do , ALTS , my main is a druid so the real joke is that even if i did raid i wouldn't get the stuff i want , i'd get +healing gear and the +damage gear will go to mages and locks before me (yes i am moonkin we do exist , tho i really don't know why)

if the expansion doesn't offer more options for me i'm gone, onto the next game. things were looking good until i saw those screenshots of that epic druid gear that was more +healing.

why can't i get some leather with sta,int and +dam ? why bother having the balance talents at all if they aren't gonna support it with gear ? cos they don't know what to do with druids and they don't care, just as they don't know what to do with non raiders and for the most part, they don't care.

from a business point of view i would have thought it makes more sense for them to dedicate more content to non raiders who spend less time on the servers and thus cost them less money , maybe my thinking is flawed there tho

Morollan

25-10-2006, 11:09 AM

We have 3 nights max 4 hours of raiding a week and its perfecly possible to have a life, why is it always the non-raiders that claim you dont have a life if you raid?... Totally agree with the OP but just wanted to pick up on this point. If I were to raid 3 nights a week for 4 hours I would be single. End of story. Get home from work, maybe have time to quickly throw some dinner down my throat and then straight on the PC for 4 hours? The girlfriend would go nuts! And that's without having any children or a job that involves shiftwork etc. The only way I would be able to do that would be if a raid started at say 21.00 or 22.00 (UK time) but then we wouldn't be done until 1.00 or 2.00 in the morning and I'd get sacked for being asleep at my desk.

Kyusoath

25-10-2006, 11:12 AM

They dont brand a game MMORPG, to just play by yourselves.

If your not raiding the newer content, then theres only one person to blame...

you think that not raiding = soloing ?

Totally agree with the OP but just wanted to pick up on this point. If I were to raid 3 nights a week for 4 hours I would be single. End of story. Get home from work, maybe have time to quickly throw some dinner down my throat and then straight on the PC for 4 hours? The girlfriend would go nuts! And that's without having any children or a job that involves shiftwork etc. The only way I would be able to do that would be if a raid started at say 21.00 or 22.00 (UK time) but then we wouldn't be done until 1.00 or 2.00 in the morning and I'd get sacked for being asleep at my desk.

^ This is the cold hard truth. ^

also.
In my old guild the raids were at 1700 when i get out of work at 2000 , i would raid from 2100 - 0200 even tho i'd be very tired at work but rest of my ex guild were pretty much school kids so that wasn't an option , join another guild i hear you say ? who ? all other guilds that raid are clearing BWL and i have one bit of tier 1 , they wouldn't look at me twice.

wesje

25-10-2006, 11:25 AM

Go play guildwars u bunch of whiners, they see the total lack of everything there, and come back

noone is forcing u to play

Morollan

25-10-2006, 11:41 AM

Go play guildwars u bunch of whiners, they see the total lack of everything there, and come back

noone is forcing u to play Thank you for that helpful and constructive post.

woeye

25-10-2006, 11:44 AM

At least in GW skill matters whereas in WoW only mindless time investment matters :-P

Kyusoath

25-10-2006, 11:46 AM

Go play guildwars u bunch of whiners, they see the total lack of everything there, and come back

noone is forcing u to play

wow, you are so right ! what a fool i have been ! thanks for the great insight!

sarcasm is the lowest form of wit. its still wit tho, which is a lot better than what you got.

infy

25-10-2006, 11:57 AM

Go play guildwars u bunch of whiners, they see the total lack of everything there, and come back

noone is forcing u to play

You sir are a fool. If you have nothing coinstructive to say, don't say anything.

Back to the point, I currently dont really have to time to raid either with my guild altho ive done ZG a few times thats it . Sholo/strat/DM/BRS offer me nothing in gear tearms, I have lots of gold with nothing to spend it on. When i herd about BC not coming out intill jan i was gutted ! ATM im just leveling an alt mostly, nothing else really to do :[

swaldman

25-10-2006, 12:04 PM

Hrm... Is it just me who thinks that the truely epic items should be earned from truely epic battles? ie 40(+) man raids?

Frankly, I disagree.

I like the Tier 0.5 quests. For somebody in blues they are actually a challenge.

Meanwhile raiding (at least MC and to a lesser extent ZG) just rewards turning up without requiring any skill, except perhaps from tanks (and leaders, in a different way).

I have some Lawbringer, and I have some Soulforge. I'm much prouder of the latter, and I personally think that it should have the better stats.

But hey, that's a different argument and one that we've had a few times before ;-)

Baldurine

25-10-2006, 12:12 PM

I totally agree about the fact that there is to little content for casual players.
I have a lvl60 priest, but if i wanna raid than i have to agree to be on minimum one raid a week with most of the guilds. I can't do that because i have a work, a wife and kids. I could probably raid 2 or 3 times in a month but not more.
I was in a guild that started up with ZG and there was only 3 lvl60 priest in the guild. They begged me to come the first time and i did(we took down the snake and bat boss). After that every time i logged on i got whispers all the time to come to ZG, but i said no because i could'nt. Then one called me rude in guild chat because i did'nt wanna do ZG and then i quit the guild.
After that i respecced to shadow and did pvp instead.

Naolin

25-10-2006, 12:33 PM

Yeah dire maul is fun, but after a year of running scholo, Strat dire maul and the BRS instances I'm bored out of my mind. Yes I raided a bit and I do have time for it, but does that mean I HAVE to raid? it's not that I want to solo or something just that most new instances are 40 man (or 20) apart from Dire maul.

Once you hit 60 and don't like to raid, you do the blue instances quests and there is just a big void.

Gealach

25-10-2006, 05:31 PM

Frankly, I disagree.

I like the Tier 0.5 quests. For somebody in blues they are actually a challenge.

Meanwhile raiding (at least MC and to a lesser extent ZG) just rewards turning up without requiring any skill, except perhaps from tanks (and leaders, in a different way).

I have some Lawbringer, and I have some Soulforge. I'm much prouder of the latter, and I personally think that it should have the better stats.

But hey, that's a different argument and one that we've had a few times before ;-)

Raiding changes after MC tho. MC is the most AFKable instance in the game, except for Ony (at least phase 1). After MC everyone has to be at least somewhat alert, because mistakes can easily wipe the raid in many places.

You get another problem with large scale raids after MC tho, and that is intense drama. Negativity, pressure to perform for extended periods of time etc. tend to suck the fun out of raids, at least for me. I go mostly because its the only content I haven't seen all of yet.

Truth be told, I kinda wish the challenge thing were switched around, such that the real challenges are in solo and duo play, and the big raids are for stuff that is more social and fun oriented. So in a sense I agree with you. =)

rgirty

25-10-2006, 05:58 PM

I typically play 2.5-3 hours a day and find that to be very adequate. I use GEM to schedule events ahead of time to prevent the long gathering times of groups and such. We can run just about any 5 man instance in that length of time and I could even get through most of our zg raid. I play 15-20 hours a week.

oledurt

25-10-2006, 07:46 PM

It seems a lot of people are in the same boat as me. I know plenty of geared players and I will tell you that those that even have full tier 1 have spent months raiding to get those sets. I also agree strongly with the poster who stated that raid guilds have core raiders that show up to every raid regardless of when they start or how long they last. Lets face it, there are people who dont have families, dont work, are blowing off school to play WoW. In my opinion those individuals are the ones that are privilged to the upper level stuff not because they are a better player then me, but because they sacrifice way more time than I do to play a video game. Bottom line is I think it is sad that Blizz keeps feeding these addicts more scraps. These players do truly skew the player base because they are the types that no matter what content is added or how difficult it is, they will play all day and night to burn through it and get it on "farm status" Then they sit and wait for the next thing. They are the minority though and most people are still sittin there and have no idea where Naxx is let alone been in it. As blizz makes another dungeon for them to burn through the gap between the regular player and the power gaming WoW addict grows more.

Stigg

25-10-2006, 08:19 PM

Raiding changes after MC tho. MC is the most AFKable instance in the game, except for Ony (at least phase 1). After MC everyone has to be at least somewhat alert, because mistakes can easily wipe the raid in many places.

You get another problem with large scale raids after MC tho, and that is intense drama. Negativity, pressure to perform for extended periods of time etc. tend to suck the fun out of raids, at least for me. I go mostly because its the only content I haven't seen all of yet.

Truth be told, I kinda wish the challenge thing were switched around, such that the real challenges are in solo and duo play, and the big raids are for stuff that is more social and fun oriented. So in a sense I agree with you. =)

which is exactly why I love MC so much...it is the least pressured raid in the game...hell even UBRS is more presured. Frankly, BWL annoys the hell outta me. If 1 person screws up on vael by pulling aggro, or not noticing the have BA, there goes the entire fight...a couple gold repair bill, a long walk, and about 15 minutes to get everything abck and ready to go. I generally make myself dinner during MC. I run over, boil some water, wait 5 minutes, run down toss in some spaghetti, wait another 10 minutes, then eat. I usually dont even have vent on...listening to the radio or watching tv. BWL? No way in hell. From the get go it is difficult...was that a mage that just ran by?!??!! Watch out for the cleave! Druids getting hit...sheep and tell tank about it! Bandage....shoot, was that another mage?!?!! And thats just the first boss...

Aswer

25-10-2006, 08:20 PM

So long seeing this same discussion, and it's always been pretty annoying. Let's see, the non-hardcore bunch have been complaining about too much 40-man raid content a lot, and I can relate to that somewhat (although I do raid actively). Blizzard now throws out a set of 5-25 man instances, and let's you choose THE DIFFICULTY SETTING! I mean, come on, what else could they have done. You can get a pug for a 10 man and play easy mode, you can go with your guild and play hard mode (and get better loot) and I still hear so much whining.

And now as for the time issue:

The guy that puts 30 minutes / day in guitar practice will never be Eric Clapton.

The guy that puts 30 minutes / day in basketball training will never be Michael Jordan.

Guess what the one that's playing WoW 30 minutes / day will actually achieve?

Welcome to how things are, not only in a game.

Lets face it, there are people who dont have families, dont work, are blowing off school to play WoW. In my opinion those individuals are the ones that are privilged to the upper level stuff not because they are a better player then me, but because they sacrifice way more time than I do to play a video game. Bottom line is I think it is sad that Blizz keeps feeding these addicts more scraps.

I'd really like to slap you for that rubbish you wrote there. So only people without a life, without a girlfriend, without a job get to see the high end content? Addicts? You must be kidding or you just don't want to see the reality. My guild is progressing in AQ40, bwl been on farm for some time, we expect to down some bosses in naxx soon, and we all have very active lives, we are mostly 25+, we all have jobs and more than one is happily married. I myself have my own company to manage, another one I am sharehodler of, a girlfriend, a household to manage on my own, and a hobby I prefer above all - snowboarding. I am still a class officer in my guild and manage to put in a respectful 70%-ish attendance at least.

Bottom line is, you are either too useless to manage your own time, or you work in the strangest shifts imaginable, cause what you spew out there is a right out insult to thousands of end-game raiders with lives that are probably much plentier than your own. I can't believe how ignorant you are.

rgirty

25-10-2006, 08:26 PM

I think most forget the point, play the game because it is FUN. If your casual schedule means the game isn't fun for you, it isn't really the developers fault. I still don't quite understand how pulling up your char screen and mousing over "loot" is fun for some people. I more enjoy playing with friends and just having a good time, but it seems a lot of people just want purple pixels?

oledurt

25-10-2006, 08:31 PM

So long seeing this same discussion, and it's always been pretty annoying. Let's see, the non-hardcore bunch have been complaining about too much 40-man raid content a lot, and I can relate to that somewhat (although I do raid actively). Blizzard now throws out a set of 5-25 man instances, and let's you choose THE DIFFICULTY SETTING! I mean, come on, what else could they have done. You can get a pug for a 10 man and play easy mode, you can go with your guild and play hard mode (and get better loot) and I still hear so much whining.

And now as for the time issue:

The guy that puts 30 minutes / day in guitar practice will never be Eric Clapton.

The guy that puts 30 minutes / day in basketball training will never be Michael Jordan.

Guess what the one that's playing WoW 30 minutes / day will actually achieve?

Welcome to how things are, not only in a game.

I'd really like to slap you for that rubbish you wrote there. So only people without a life, without a girlfriend, without a job get to see the high end content? Addicts? You must be kidding or you just don't want to see the reality. My guild is progressing in AQ40, bwl been on farm for some time, we expect to down some bosses in naxx soon, and we all have very active lives, we are mostly 25+, we all have jobs and more than one is happily married. I myself have my own company to manage, another one I am sharehodler of, a girlfriend, a household to manage on my own, and a hobby I prefer above all - snowboarding. I am still a class officer in my guild and manage to put in a respectful 70%-ish attendance at least.

Bottom line is, you are either too useless to manage your own time, or you work in the strangest shifts imaginable, cause what you spew out there is a right out insult to thousands of end-game raiders with lives that are probably much plentier than your own. I can't believe how ignorant you are.

heh...besides your limp attempts to personally insult me which I will not entertain. I am not certain that you refuted one thing I wrote in my post. :afro:

Numbra

25-10-2006, 09:07 PM

Having been on both sides of this fence of a topic, I can sympothize with both sides. I do think Blizzard realizes this and most content in BC I believe will take care of this. The big guilds that enjoy raiding can continue their paths and those of us that enjoy playing at our own pace will have a slew of new 5 mans and quests to work on. Just be patient and wait until the bugs are out of BC and it is ready to be played. Level and alt, work on rep, stockpile mats,see some movies, go shopping, read some books, catch up on some sleep, or simply suspend your account for a few months and come back when it is ready. I think the future of Blizzard will be more 5 man content and raiding content at the same time. Though I do understand the frustration of waiting, we really have no other choice until it is ready.Hardcore raiding and casual playing both require talent and understanding to do effectivley, i respect both sides.

Aswer

25-10-2006, 09:27 PM

heh...besides your limp attempts to personally insult me which I will not entertain. I am not certain that you refuted one thing I wrote in my post. :afro:

Lets face it, there are people who dont have families, dont work, are blowing off school to play WoW. In my opinion those individuals are the ones that are privilged to the upper level stuff not because they are a better player then me, but because they sacrifice way more time than I do to play a video game. Bottom line is I think it is sad that Blizz keeps feeding these addicts more scraps.

You wrote that, did you not? Well I'd say my sole existence is the refutal to your post.

And you have the nerve of talking about insults after posting that....unbelievable!

This is just like those people that say their neighbour must be a criminal or a drug dealer cause he has that fancy car, that say that the girl at the office that was just promoted got there by blowing the boss, that his colleague got the managing position by telling off on the rest of people in the office, etc.

So everyone that manages what you can't is a no-lifer, huh? No one can be as magnificent to do everything you do in real life, and still be able to squeeze time to achieve what you can't? Bunch of no-lifers, you say? Yeah we are all school dropouts, we have no life, no jobs, we are all addicts. Right. I'll make sure to mention that on my assembly meeting tomorrow at 8 am. After hopefully clearing twins tonight.

Therapy is -----> that way, good luck.

Houdy

25-10-2006, 09:46 PM

I wish there would've been at least a few new 5-man instances to pop up, but there wasnt.

Let me ask something..
of you people who don't have anything to do because you''ve done all the 5-mans til their death, can you not put together 20 people 2 times a week for 2 hours at a time and try out ZG/AQ20? Maybe you only play one of those times.. maybe you skip a week but play twice the next week.. whatever.. it's not impossible.
If you cannot do that, then you are playing the wrong game, may i suggest NVN..part 2 is due soon. not being a troll, seriously.. NWN1 was awesome.. NWN2 would probably be right up most WoW players alleys.

I've known a lot of "casual" players who play enough to do those low end raids,and even MC.
With a game that has been out for nearly 2 years, you do realize that even with bits and pieces of low end raiding you could've enjoyed more of the game.

Hell, I have a career, a wife, i volunteer with the humane society and various dog rescues, ride my sport quad, play softball and hockey, snowboard, have an active social life etc.. and I have been able to get 3 toons epic gear (ZG-tier 3 stuffs) and enjoy all kinds of great encounters and events (Eranikus, AQ gates, green dragons, etc..) all without spending too much time in the game.

I know that too many of you incorrectly view raiding and the investment it takes and often times exagerrate the requirements to get your points across, i cant blame you, I would be kinda upset if i played a MMORPG and there wasnt enough content to keep me satisfied. At the same time, who kept you playing since you defeated DM and Scholo? Or are you complaining with the hopes that Blizzard will see how many of you are upset and do something about it?
If the subscriber numbers were dropping at a high rate monthly, i might be inclined to agree with you that the end game, or lack thereof, is ruining it for people.. but when i see constant number increases, new websites, new merchandise and a society filled with people that enjoy this game, i am beginning to wonder just how big or small the vocal casual fanbase is?

Again.. i too wish there were more 5-man content, but dont act as if it's impossible to have attempted and eventually beat the low end raid content.
Heck, i bet that in the last 8 months if you wouldve found 30'ish other people to play with, you couldve nailed down ZG and AQ20.. and took a few shots on MC over a given timeframe.

If you log in for 2 hours a week and expect results for something.. i dont even think you could get that from any new 5-man anyhow. Are you "casual" folks even playing enough to justify adding new 5-man content? Because it seems from your words that you dont play a lot.. so why bother adding in content you dont have time to enjoy?

thanks for reading all this.

LordXeper

25-10-2006, 10:04 PM

I concider myself a casual player. Yes, I do raid 3 times a week clearing MC/BWL and now starting on AQ40. THis is 4.5 hour (including getting ready) per raid. Thus 13.5 hours a week. Thats not much. I do not require to grind pots or whatever as KCMA's AH abuse method gives me enough gold per week to flask up a raid if needed. THis takes me maybe 2 hours of pure AH work per week. So I play say 16 hours per week. Thats NOT THAT MUCH concidering what some people put in. Remember a real casual will spend 3 hours in UBRS, thats more time then we spend in MC or BWL. SO stop nagging about casual bs. You can even raid end-game and be a casual like me.

Ryste

25-10-2006, 10:12 PM

It's not being casual or being hardcore.

My priest gets tell to help ZG/AQ20 from people I don't know from time to time.

Give me a reason why I should go even if I am going to play for the enxt 5 hours straight? Sure people can throw a group together, but will those 20 people be the same next time or do we have to re-teach everything to some brand new 20 people again?

When I go do something I want to feel like I learn something new and accomplish something. What do I accomplish by playing with 20 new people every other week teaching them again and again?

This is the reason why people don't PUG much, because there are too many uncertainties. If 90% of the pugs can clean ZG/AQ20...etc raid dungeons, you bet there will be more people pugging. Sadly WoW is not set up like that. Thus people are scared to invest time on those instances.

oledurt

25-10-2006, 10:21 PM

You wrote that, did you not? Well I'd say my sole existence is the refutal to your post..

My post wasnt refering to you specifically, you related yourself to it then began to /rant.

"And you have the nerve of talking about insults after posting that....unbelievable!."

As I already said before, I wound not entertain your sophmoric insults.

"This is just like those people that say their neighbour must be a criminal or a drug dealer cause he has that fancy car, that say that the girl at the office that was just promoted got there by blowing the boss, that his colleague got the managing position by telling off on the rest of people in the office, etc.."

and which people are you refering? Please be specific.

"So everyone that manages what you can't is a no-lifer, huh? No one can be as magnificent to do everything you do in real life, and still be able to squeeze time to achieve what you can't? Bunch of no-lifers, you say? Yeah we are all school dropouts, we have no life, no jobs, we are all addicts. Right. I'll make sure to mention that on my assembly meeting tomorrow at 8 am. After hopefully clearing twins tonight. ."

These are your words not mine, and I did not say "all" people. Specifically I stated...

"Lets face it, there are people who dont have families, dont work, are blowing off school to play WoW. In my opinion those individuals are the ones that are privilged to the upper level stuff."

If you claim to not be this individual(s) then how does my post apply to you?

"Therapy is -----> that way, good luck."

...

rgirty

25-10-2006, 10:58 PM

oledurt I think you might be doing a bit of trolling.

I'll give my short response.

People who devote more time to a given "function" will typically be "better" at it. I realize that there are exceptions to this.

Casual players *such as myself* shouldn't expect to get the same treatment and or as much from the game as people who play more. I believe the game is very friendly to casuals now at least more so than other MMO's.

cyradis2003

25-10-2006, 11:34 PM

I'd really like to slap you for that rubbish you wrote there.

Bottom line is, you are either too useless to manage your own time,

cause what you spew out there is a right out insult to thousands of end-game raiders with lives that are probably much plentier than your own.

I can't believe how ignorant you are.

Wow, I am guessing your company isn't PR and doesn't involve you actually dealing with clients. You say you are insulted but your posts are the most insulting and inflamatory in this thread.

I would suggest you take some of your well managed time and read the forum rules about polite behavior.

To address your points now ... No one expects to be in raid content for 30 min a day. No one said that they do. No one has said lets take away all the raids and screw those hardcore folks! No one is wanting to take you purples or stop your fun. No one wants them to stop adding raid content.

We just want to play too. Not everyone likes to be a faceless cog in a big machine of a 40 man raid. We want smaller content. We are getting smaller content. We are happy. The problem is that it is delayed now. No, this thread won't make it come faster but maybe we are enjoying the discussion ... sans your little tantrums.

Time spent playing: Who are we to say that someone doesn't play enough? Doesn't manage time well enough to play a video game more? In real life there are variables. If a person gets home at 6pm and helps the munchkins with homework then has dinner at 8 with the family and tucks the kids in at 9 which part of this routine should be cut so that he can "properly manage" his time to raid in WOW? Lets cut kids out of the equation. Person gets home at 6 and his girlfriend wants to talk about thier respective days, watch some Jeopardy and get a foot rub before dinner maybe he can't get on until later. Maybe someone has a girlfriend that doesn't like it when they play 3 hours a night more than once or twice? Maybe people have to go to MBA classes? Or take kids (yup, they are back in) to Ballet, Soccer, Drama etc? Maybe someone has to spend a few nights a week with an elderly relative or works a second job?

These people should have options in the game as well. I am not saying raiding guilds should open enrollment and let people in that can't meet the schedules but WOW should implement content for the more casual players AS WELL AS the uber gods of raiding. Why does everyone think it has to be all one or all the other. 6 million accounts worldwide not all of them are going to have the same schedules or the same availability or commitments.

PS Plentier is not a word.

zkajan

25-10-2006, 11:43 PM

-there should be content for everyone, regardless of playstyle, blizzard made a big mistake not releasing any 5 mans after dire maul
-harder content that costs more gold in repairs and consumables and time should provide better rewards (killing kel'thuzad should give more/better reward than kiling baron rivendare)

blizzard has so far (don't know yet about expansion) done well on that second but not well on the first, imho (and i'm in a guild with 11/15 bosses down in Naxxramas)

Gealach

25-10-2006, 11:45 PM

Being a raider and spending a lot of time playing the game have nothing to do with each other.

If we are going to reward players for time and effort, then Swaldman is correct and the dungeon 2 set should be equivalent to at least tier 2 raid gear in quality. The fact is, many raid epics are easier to get than the dungeon set 2 gear, which is why you see so few people bothering to do the whole chain.

The most challenging content really should be stuff like the Benediction quests, the Rhokh'delar/Lok'delar quests, and that sort of thing, where you can't count on more competent fellow players to just carry you through. And the stats on the gear from quests like these really should be the best gear you can get.

rgirty

25-10-2006, 11:52 PM

I think the fact that it is the most massively popular game of all time with as many subscribers as they can support would indicate they are doing a good job overall. I believe one of their main issues at this time is upgrading the server hardware.

I doubt that many if any casual players have exaulted standing with any or all factions. As a casual player exaulted with AD is something I'm striving for, I believe that while it may not be as fun as a new 5 man there is still a considerable amount of content for people who are casual.

oledurt

26-10-2006, 12:46 AM

oledurt I think you might be doing a bit of trolling.

not sure what you mean? Did you read this whole thread, or did you just go to the last page read my last post and assume that? :afro:

Twoflower

26-10-2006, 03:32 AM

on my server there are always pickup groups for zul gurub, aq 20, onyxia and molten core. It was open since release though, so most chars there are alts whos player knows the instance allready. maybee it is a server age thing ?

edit : i wanted to add that i guess that at least 80% of my server has been in mc, so raiding isnt that elitist at all.

teck21

26-10-2006, 04:09 AM

This is one issue where people constantly argue at cross purposes.

For many so-called casuals (more accurately the people who don't get to raid), the issue is not how much playtime they get in a week.

Some get 15-20, which is more than quite a lot of raiders, but quite often this 15-20 hours does not come in daily 3 hour blocks or something, but rather 30 mins today, 2 hours tomorrow, and maybe a full day on the weekend, but in between he or she may have to go off and do stuff for 4 hours before logging back on. The key point is that few, if any blocks of playtime can be predicted or scheduled with any kind of certainty.

This hardly makes scheduling oneself for any raid feasible. Even for PUGs, especially aloy of us want to do things from start to finish, we don't quit halfway. We can't stay the course, we let others who can, do.

It is as absurd to accuse people who find time to raid and acquire uber gear losers with no life as it is to accuse someone who claims to have no time to raid as being a loser who dos not know how to schedule his or her life.

The main gripe amongst most non-raiders is truly the lack of new and more challenging content. Raiders get to move on from ZG/AQ20 -> MC -> BWL -> AQ40 -> Naxx.

Non raiders get to Scholo <-> DM <-> Strat <-> BRS. It's all sideways after a while, a much shorter while than raiders.

Tier 0.5? It's fun to try getting, but it's still crap compared to even the 20-man purples mostly. And then what?

rgirty, 'I doubt that many if any casual players have exaulted standing with any or all factions. As a casual player exaulted with AD is something I'm striving for, I believe that while it may not be as fun as a new 5 man there is still a considerable amount of content for people who are casual.'

That's true, but getting exalted with AD is alot of Scholo / Strat grinding, and in the end, what do you get for months and months of effort doing the exact same thing with no gear you could possibly want anymore from either instance? Compare it with raiders who spend months doing the exact the same repetitive things in the raid instances as well?

For even the hard core non-raiders (yes, they do exist), the amount of work put in simply deserves more than what's available to them.

Aswer

26-10-2006, 11:28 AM

Wow, I am guessing your company isn't PR and doesn't involve you actually dealing with clients. You say you are insulted but your posts are the most insulting and inflamatory in this thread.

My job is exactly about dealing with clients and we are doing just fine, thank you.

I would suggest you take some of your well managed time and read the forum rules about polite behavior.

To address your points now ... No one expects to be in raid content for 30 min a day. No one said that they do. No one has said lets take away all the raids and screw those hardcore folks! No one is wanting to take you purples or stop your fun. No one wants them to stop adding raid content.

Exactly why I posted my previous post about difficulty modes in instances in TBC. Oh and by the way, I have not broken any forum rules here, so perhaps you are the one who either needs to read them again or actually try to understand them.

We just want to play too. Not everyone likes to be a faceless cog in a big machine of a 40 man raid. We want smaller content. We are getting smaller content. We are happy. The problem is that it is delayed now. No, this thread won't make it come faster but maybe we are enjoying the discussion ... sans your little tantrums.

No one is happy about the delay indeed, but I prefer a delay to having a product with unlimited bugs.

Time spent playing: Who are we to say that someone doesn't play enough? Doesn't manage time well enough to play a video game more? In real life there are variables. If a person gets home at 6pm and helps the munchkins with homework then has dinner at 8 with the family and tucks the kids in at 9 which part of this routine should be cut so that he can "properly manage" his time to raid in WOW? Lets cut kids out of the equation. Person gets home at 6 and his girlfriend wants to talk about thier respective days, watch some Jeopardy and get a foot rub before dinner maybe he can't get on until later. Maybe someone has a girlfriend that doesn't like it when they play 3 hours a night more than once or twice? Maybe people have to go to MBA classes? Or take kids (yup, they are back in) to Ballet, Soccer, Drama etc? Maybe someone has to spend a few nights a week with an elderly relative or works a second job?

When one has to deal with kids, of course, that is a priority and there are no discussions about that. Once you decide to raise little ones it is a full time job and nothing should take a priority over that. For everything else, I pity those that have girlfriends that can't understand and even appreciate their need to disconnect themselves into a virtual world. Mine understands it, supports it, and she has never played any kind of computer game in her life. May I suggest some real (not unilateral) communication?

These people should have options in the game as well. I am not saying raiding guilds should open enrollment and let people in that can't meet the schedules but WOW should implement content for the more casual players AS WELL AS the uber gods of raiding. Why does everyone think it has to be all one or all the other. 6 million accounts worldwide not all of them are going to have the same schedules or the same availability or commitments.

Exactly my point.

PS Plentier is not a word.

Indeed. Posting on forums in three different languages while translating everything in my head doesn't really help, but I'd like to thank you for the hint there. It is really helpful and it contributes to the raiding debate.

Kyusoath

26-10-2006, 11:48 AM

-harder content that costs more gold in repairs and consumables and time should provide better rewards (killing kel'thuzad should give more/better reward than kiling baron rivendare)

i want to be able spend time in a more piece by piece way, instead of having to raid 5 hours twice per week how about content that gives similar rewards for 1 hour per day over 10 days , its the same amount of time invested

some challenging 2 man content would be nice.

oh how about a quest to solo thru ZF and kill a certain 60 elite that spawns as part of the quest ? would be interesting content recycling.

ps Aswer is annoying me too.

swaldman

26-10-2006, 01:15 PM

One simple way that raid content could be made more accessible to all (Well simple in concept, I don't know about execution) is configurable raid resets.

If a guild wants to take their time and do MC with a two-week or a monthly reset, let them.

Oh, and do away with trash respawns... please......

Aswer

26-10-2006, 01:20 PM

Oh, and do away with trash respawns... please......

QFT!

Oh, and to someone who posted about faction reputation vs. casual, my opinion is that reputation rewards were introduced exactly to cater for casual players. Yes, you do need a lot of time to get exalted with xxxx faction, but it can be done in time chunks of any size, thus "casual" players are catered for, although it may take aeons.

Icefrost

26-10-2006, 04:28 PM

For even the hard core non-raiders (yes, they do exist), the amount of work put in simply deserves more than what's available to them.
No need to write those 200 word posts anymore, this says it all if you ask me.

Kyusoath

27-10-2006, 03:19 AM

For even the hard core non-raiders (yes, they do exist), the amount of work put in simply deserves more than what's available to them.

yes , sums it up , you win.

teck21

27-10-2006, 04:33 AM

swaldman, 'One simple way that raid content could be made more accessible to all (Well simple in concept, I don't know about execution) is configurable raid resets.

If a guild wants to take their time and do MC with a two-week or a monthly reset, let them.

Oh, and do away with trash respawns... please......'

I also think that's a brilliant idea, not just for raids, especially the smaller more casual ones, but for normal instances as well. Maybe the 5-mans can be saved by the party leader for resumption another day within a one week period for example.

I don't see how this disadvantages the larger, more professionally organized guilds because they will get to run more, and ultimately still progress faster than the smallish ones.

To prevent abuse perhaps, this can be arranged such that only the exact same group of people who went in and save themselves to the instance can go back in to resume their run.

I know this is very highly situational, but it really helps for a small minority of players. I am fortunate enough to get to play alot more than my friends, most of whom have insane working hours.

We try to run instances, but it is ridiculously late by the time they get on, and it would be really helpful if we could save the instance and resume it another day.

Doind away with trash respawns is making it a little bit too ez-mode though I think. Maybe they can have a better mixture of static mobs, pats, and maybe radom spawn mobs in instances with only the last two types respawning.

Maybe someone should post this idea on the official suggestions forum. Probably been done many times, but it never hurts to bug them some more. I would if I was even able to post on their forums, but I got a stupid ISP who refuse to help me. At least they provide me a good connection for WoW. :smiley:

swaldman

27-10-2006, 08:28 AM

cyradis2003

27-10-2006, 04:02 PM

Oh and by the way, I have not broken any forum rules here, so perhaps you are the one who either needs to read them again or actually try to understand them.

May I suggest some real (not unilateral) communication?

Exactly my point.

Indeed. Posting on forums in three different languages while translating everything in my head doesn't really help, but I'd like to thank you for the hint there. It is really helpful and it contributes to the raiding debate.

Sooo .... the overall tone of your post was fine as it was? Personally I saw flames all over it and it wasn't even directed at me. Flames by the way are against the forum rules.

My girlfriend doesn't need communicating with, she knows her place ... in the kitchen getting me dinner while I play WoW.

I am so pleased that you post in 3 different languages and have a thriving business, I'm an astronaut myself with a side job as a firefighter and I perform brain surgery on weekends.

pss. it is "more plentiful" sorry, I should have been more helpful.

DrOsmius

27-10-2006, 06:22 PM

It becomes very difficult for a someone who is not able to make most raids, can only occasionally find time to make one raid, and not even at a regular schedule to get a spot on the raid. The less you go, the less you get to go. In the end, you don't get to go at all because no one knows who you are when it comes to raiding.

That is about exactly my situation. I choose not to sacrifice time with my family more than the one weeknight, which allows me to join 1 of our 4 weekly raids. I feel lucky to have found a group that does well and that lets me and others like me join.

But I am always behind the curve. The core raiders have better stuff (i earn points so much slower, that I only get stuff after they all have theirs), so they are the ones to "learn" the new stuff, though they then think we are (somewhat) freeloading off their success. And of course, they want to move on, just as I am allowed to join in....

So overall, it is a struggle. If they started raids at 10pm, I'd be there 5 nights a week and covered in purple. As it is, it is still more than I ever thought would happen, and this game given me waaaaaay more hours of satisfaction/leisure than any other computer game ever.

/salute Blizz

Trepidation

27-10-2006, 08:03 PM

For even the hard core non-raiders (yes, they do exist), the amount of work put in simply deserves more than what's available to them.

You my friend are a genius. While I agree that content that requires more people should have slightly better gear (this is an MMO, need some way to encourage it), right now the difference is very large. Tier 0.5 vs T3 is :shocked:

IMO, T3 should only be 10-20% better than the best gear available to those who do 5 man content the same amount of hours.

etheidox

27-10-2006, 08:38 PM

Raiding is why I am quiting WOW to focus on FPS games. I can jump in to a game of Battlefield 2142, UT2k4, or CS and play for a few round (or an hour or so) and still enjoy every minute.

WOW takes 3-5 hours to get going and from a casual standpoint the frustraition level is high. I used to play SWG and found that there were so many things to do outside of grind, pvp, or raid. I could craft things, build a house, become a pilot, politician etc. WOW really just is a simple treadmill that raises every couples months.

Re-rolling an alt is like eating Krispy Cream donuts for 6 months, gaining 40 lbs and hoping back on the treadmill to lose the weight.

I'm done with this game.

Jeff

rgirty

27-10-2006, 08:44 PM

I commend you sir, many others need to be able to realize when they aren't having fun it is time to quit.

The idea is to have fun, if you are experiencing frustration or a lack of a good time then you should definitely do something else.

To me, all games are just a way to entertain myself and a time sink just a way to have some fun for a few hours.

Kyusoath

28-10-2006, 04:48 AM

when another game comes out i'll be gone instantly, W:AR looks good but i'm not playing another game with dwarfs and bloody orcs in it, if only someone could make a decent Sci-fi mmo or at least a game without gnomes and cartoony elves. guild wars could have been so good but they screwed it up.

Icefrost

28-10-2006, 06:30 PM

You my friend are a genius. While I agree that content that requires more people should have slightly better gear (this is an MMO, need some way to encourage it)
Then again, do the groups have to be massive for this game to be called a "MassiveMO"? No.
Besides, the best group to play the game with, is real-life freinds, and I doubt too many people know 40-100 other that good friends who play WoW.

Valas Azuviir

28-10-2006, 11:20 PM

Trepidation

31-10-2006, 05:16 PM

Ok.. Just went throught this entire thread and had to duck several carelessly tossed about firebolts by several posters. So, I'm just going to give a general warning and afterwards, if anyone is foolish enough to start it up again, start handing out cool off periods.

While, I can understand the passion involved in this discussion, it is one which has raged endlessly since the start of the MMORPG genre, and quite frankly, it's highly reminsicent of the Blood Wars. Both sides have their points, but they refuse to accept that of one and other, so they just keep on fighting.

But just to address the title of this discussion. It's been a bad year? How so? Are you having fun, yes or no? If, yes, then how can you say it's been a bad year?

If, no.. Well, then go do something else, whether an alt or another game becomes irrelevant at that point. No one is forcing you to continue to do something, which you do not deem fun. Why do you folks think, that a lot of other folks have put their accounts on inactive and gone off until TBC is released? They weren't having fun, so they went off to do something else, until they could have fun again.

In the end, it is your choice as to what you do with your time. But choose wisely, for while the true Grail will bring you life, the false Grail will take it from you.:grin:

Even though you are a moderator...I gotta counter you. Even though you tried to write it "tact", all I heard was "if you don't like it, quit". If I was in a vaccum by myself, I believe your thought process would be correct. However, some of us actually have a large community we hang with. We stay for the people, but the current content methdology leaves us in a bind. Stay in a game you are no longer enjoying because of the people or go find a game you like and lose the people? This is one of the huge issues with MMO's.

From Blizzard's point of view..would it be better to try and provide more content to more people or provide content to a small section of people? I think that the fact that Blizzard is on top right now puts them in a position where they don't really have to worry about it too much. Next question is would be it wise of them to foster an enviroment where the player believes that new content will be available to them on a periodic basis? I think they have done very well on this front for the 40-man raid crowd...but what about the non-40-man raid crowd which compromises a much larger % of the server population? I think if Blizzard did that they would keep they player base longer if not grow it. I think it would further lock the market that they have now and make it even harder others to get into.

I think all the non-40-man peeps are asking for is Blizzard to throw them bone worth chewing on.

rgirty

31-10-2006, 05:23 PM

Create puggable 5 mans with easy to obtain and not so hot loot.

Make a few insanely tough 25-40 man raids where trash mobs are difficult and boss mobs are insanely hard.

Kind of scale it that way?

After all if it is a MMO world shouldn't there be an instance boss that the players find nearly if not impossible to take down. If said guild takes down such boss maybe they could be written into the Lore? Like the first guild that took down KT, wouldn't it be cool if he was removed from teh game in the next content patch and lore written in to show that those char's defeated him? I think that would be great... like an ongoing story and cause some real competition for the hardcore folks.

The casual people, like myself are really just support cast.

oledurt

31-10-2006, 07:39 PM

what about if Blizz applied a lock out to the item instead of the raid etc...If they did that then the high end raid guilds would be forced to recruit more players so that if there MT gets locked out because of that legendary sword they would need to go to a reserve player for the next run. Maybe shorten the instance lockout too?

I dunno just a thought...

rgirty

31-10-2006, 07:53 PM

I don't think that would be very fair to the person who had fought so hard to obtain the item.

Then again, I am more for "static" items. I think there should be some things, hopefuly "frostmourne" if it ever enters the game that there are only 1 of and it is unique.

djiss

31-10-2006, 10:20 PM

We stay for the people, but the current content methdology leaves us in a bind. Stay in a game you are no longer enjoying because of the people or go find a game you like and lose the people? This is one of the huge issues with MMO's.
What about just trying to find another activity to share with them?

I can picture it like that:
You were in a bowling league, meeting the friday for 4h in row of fun. Then you're no more enjoying play bowling but you want to stay with your friend. So you keep coming at the bowling every friday even if you don't play. After 2 month of this, you're finding yourself not enjoying any longer those friday night you share with your friend doing something you no more like. Then you go to see the owner asking to give you more enterainment, saying his place is now boring and you have nothing to do....

You're problem have nothing with mmorpg, raiding or non-raiding stuff imo.
I made some friend in WoW, if I want to keep talking to them the day I won't be interested to play wow anymore, I'll just ask them their mail/phone number or a way to contact them. Instead of paying 15$ a month. Just a thought :smiley:

I don't think that would be very fair to the person who had fought so hard to obtain the item.
They still can say: "I won it when that place was hard as hell. Nothing to compare to your nerfed and fluffy dungeon you now have." and keep their leet attitude.

edit:
But even if I didnt had lot of new content to enjoy, I'm the kind who like to start an alt, just to change my mind for a week of 2, then I come back. Even if I don't have any non-raidong content to see, I still can learn about other class, I always find it usefull to find counter in PvP against them.

Valas Azuviir

31-10-2006, 11:48 PM

Even though you are a moderator...I gotta counter you.

Eh, meant that bit more in the sense of, the first one to start flaming folks because they disagree with them is going to get a cool off period, not that folks simply disagreeing and then debating about said differences would get a cool off period. :grin:

There is a difference between the two. How you phrased it, is good. How it was phrased previously. That's another issue all together.

Even though you tried to write it "tact", all I heard was "if you don't like it, quit". If I was in a vaccum by myself, I believe your thought process would be correct. However, some of us actually have a large community we hang with. We stay for the people, but the current content methdology leaves us in a bind. Stay in a game you are no longer enjoying because of the people or go find a game you like and lose the people? This is one of the huge issues with MMO's.

Lot of folks still "play" EQ that way, they don't actually play, they just use it as a glorified chat room really with prettier pictures. And if that swings their boat, more power to them.

Anyway, do you really think that the folks who've put WoW into the freezer until TBC don't have a large social group that they like to hang out with?

Heck, I've seen a fair amount of folks over on the Azeroth Guardians forum do exactly that. They love their guildies to death, but raiding all the time, they don't deem fun. So, they're walking away for a bit, but they will be back, because they suspect that TBC will bring them what they do want, smaller scale grouping and other things. It's just that in the mean time they got other things to do. It's only 3 months, and if the friendship is true, then they'll be waiting with open arms, once the path leads them back their way.

It's not a permanent farewell, but a temporary one. So TBC hits the stores in January instead of late November. Not that much of a big deal really, and a tad much to say that because of this, the entire year has brought nothing but misery.

Heck, the classes have been seriously reshuffled, there was the whole floating around Naxx event (short as it might've been), the opening of the Gates (as buggy as it was) and the preperation to it (lot of folks got their second to third mount out of that event, due to the rep rewards) the tweaks of the various BGs, the various faction rep rewards (boring grinds maybe, but it gives you something to do, least if you're rather compulsive to max yourself like myself). There's been plenty to do and more good things are coming your way, you're just going to have to be a little bit patient really.

From Blizzard's point of view..would it be better to try and provide more content to more people or provide content to a small section of people? I think that the fact that Blizzard is on top right now puts them in a position where they don't really have to worry about it too much.

If, that were so, why the sudden abandonment of the 40-person raid instances? Why, the retooling towards just 5, 10 and 25 people raid instances? Originally, TBC was slated to hit all the marks, the 40s included, and before anyone starts.. I do not raid, I'm not a member of any guild, so it's not as if I'm looking out for my own interests here. I'll join a guild once all my characters are level 50 and considering I got 14 of them.. :grin:

The point I'm trying to make is, Blizzard is keeping the smaller guilds in mind while designing TBC. All that stuff you're asking for, they're working on it. And they're working as fast as they can, but unless you want a hopelessly buggy and unplayable experience, you folks will need to exercise some patience. Rome wasn't built in a day afterall.

Next question is would be it wise of them to foster an enviroment where the player believes that new content will be available to them on a periodic basis? I think they have done very well on this front for the 40-man raid crowd...but what about the non-40-man raid crowd which compromises a much larger % of the server population? I think if Blizzard did that they would keep they player base longer if not grow it. I think it would further lock the market that they have now and make it even harder others to get into.

I think all the non-40-man peeps are asking for is Blizzard to throw them bone worth chewing on.

Bone is on its way though. In addition, in order to create another small scale instance, they'd still have to draw folks away, who are working on TBC, meaning that it would be even more delayed. You can't have both at the same time, not with so many staff positions at Blizzard still left unfilled. It's a simple manpower issue. Sure, you can shuffle folks around, but that means that other work is either left undone or it will be done poorly. I suspect that neither will be deemed acceptable alternatives either.

And as for the periodic content updates. I'm not sure if they're going to continue with those, now that they're planning on the whole expansion a year plan. Most of the stuff we've gotten over the last two years, was material originally intended to have been implemented in WoW proper before it went gold.

And there's still plenty of stuff, that they still haven't included, like The Vault within Stormwind proper, the Emerald Dream, Mount Hyjal and the list goes on and on. Me?? I'd be tickled pink, quite an accomplishment as a Ssri'Tel'Quessir but that's another issue, if they were to continue with bi- or trimonthly patches with some extra goodies that we didn't need to fork over any additional dough for. I'm just highly doubtful that we're going to get that, but I wouldn't mind being proven wrong on that. :laughing:

Anyway, the potential dearth of material will effect everyone, whether it be the small guilds or the bigger ones or even the solo players. So trying to play the blame game, (not you specifically Trep, I'm talking folks in general,) isn't going to help, it's not going to change the situation, and it's just going to lead to a lot of animosity for no valid reason. And that seems like a waste of time + energy + effort to me.

kcma

01-11-2006, 01:16 AM

i dont think i was ever shy on this topic and i'm sure most ppl know where i stand on this. all i can say is i look forward to tough contents that doesn't require man power.

Morollan

01-11-2006, 11:31 AM

Regarding Valas's posts - You seem to be saying that there's lots of stuff in the expansion for smaller groups and solo players and, believe me, I'm very happy about that. But the point of this thread was to say, why wasn't any of this done in the many months since WoW first hit the stores? Why was almost every piece of content that has been patched into the game since release geared towards raiders? Other than Dire Maul, which was implemented before I even started playing (and I've been playing well over a year now), what content was added for the millions of players who don't raid? Answer - not a lot.

Would it really have killed Blizz to have chucked in one or two new 5-man instances during the last year? Having spent so much time working on ZG, AQ and Naxx it's only natural that the majority who don't raid feel a little neglected. Surely some of that design time could have been spent creating a really challenging new instance for those who've been at 60 for a while and would like something new to do that doesn't involve 19 or 39 other people? Something above and beyond Dire Maul, Scholo, Strat and BRS. Could they not have taken some of the ideas that went into AQ and Naxx and downsized them for a 5-man instance?

That's all that people are saying. Don't concentrate on one part of your customer base and leave the (larger) part out in the cold.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 04:56 PM

One of the arguments I've seen is that raiding is for better players, but truthfully, that's only because the tougher content is raiding content. The only thing that's *inherently* tougher about raiding is getting 39 other people to the same place at the same time.

Ryste

01-11-2006, 05:47 PM

i dont think i was ever shy on this topic and i'm sure most ppl know where i stand on this. all i can say is i look forward to tough contents that doesn't require man power.

There can't be tough contents without man power.

It's much easier to ask 5-10 people to do the right thing than 40 people to all do the right thing.

The organization, the pressure are not linear relationships between a 5man instance and a raid instance. I am not saying 5 man instances can't be challenging, but they are not epic proportions. Personally I don't like raiding, I don't even like 5 man instances, I play a game to pvp. I don't see how PvE after reaching the levle cap is any fun. Reason why I took a 6 months break.

One of the arguments I've seen is that raiding is for better players, but truthfully, that's only because the tougher content is raiding content. The only thing that's *inherently* tougher about raiding is getting 39 other people to the same place at the same time.

Raiding is not for better players. However, it's tougher to get 39 people to do the right thing than to get 5 people to do the right thing.

In every game in the world, if a person have more time invest in it, he will be better at it. In a video game, it often means he gets better items, he can finish the game faster. In sports it often means he will be drafted to the profesionals.

Playing 1 hour every weekend is not going to get him anywhere in life, video game or not.

Regarding Valas's posts - You seem to be saying that there's lots of stuff in the expansion for smaller groups and solo players and, believe me, I'm very happy about that. But the point of this thread was to say, why wasn't any of this done in the many months since WoW first hit the stores? Why was almost every piece of content that has been patched into the game since release geared towards raiders? Other than Dire Maul, which was implemented before I even started playing (and I've been playing well over a year now), what content was added for the millions of players who don't raid? Answer - not a lot.

Would it really have killed Blizz to have chucked in one or two new 5-man instances during the last year? Having spent so much time working on ZG, AQ and Naxx it's only natural that the majority who don't raid feel a little neglected. Surely some of that design time could have been spent creating a really challenging new instance for those who've been at 60 for a while and would like something new to do that doesn't involve 19 or 39 other people? Something above and beyond Dire Maul, Scholo, Strat and BRS. Could they not have taken some of the ideas that went into AQ and Naxx and downsized them for a 5-man instance?

That's all that people are saying. Don't concentrate on one part of your customer base and leave the (larger) part out in the cold.

No they can't and should not chuck in one or two new 5 man instances IMO.

Blizzard is not stupid, I am sure they kept a set of data on the frequency of dungeon accesses. ...etc

Let's take a good look at 5 man dungeons and how "tough" are they?

In beta, the gnomergan boss was a fun and tough fight, for the first wipe. It took us less than 2 wipes (total of 20 minutes) to learn the fight and perfect it. Now, running the whole dungeon took 4 hours to perfect. 4 hours of my time felt the challenge of the dungeon that the blizzard developers took at least a few months to implment.

In release, the boss fight in Uldaman took us another wipe to perfect. Another 4 hours of my time where I felt challenge, which again took the developers at least a few months to implment the dungeon.

Now let's take a look at raid dungeons, it took my guild months and months of tries to perfect MC, BWL. And we raided every week, 3-4 times a week. We spend as much time in raid dungeons as it would in 5 man instances. Look at the return value of development time vs. player time. A much better return ratio, months of development vs. months of challenge to players.

Now, if there are a mass exodus of players, for example, a drop from 5 million to 1 million subscribers, maybe Blizzard will change their focus before the expansion. However, as subscribers climb to record high, they will continue focus on what returns the most valuable of their development time, which in this case 40 man instances. This is not a should or can't, World of Warcraft is a business, and Blizzard is running a good business.

Also, there may be other constraints in developing many 5 man instances which are fundamentally against the game mechanics which Blizzard is changing in the expansion.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 07:18 PM

Raiding is not for better players. However, it's tougher to get 39 people to do the right thing than to get 5 people to do the right thing.

In every game in the world, if a person have more time invest in it, he will be better at it. In a video game, it often means he gets better items, he can finish the game faster. In sports it often means he will be drafted to the profesionals.

Playing 1 hour every weekend is not going to get him anywhere in life, video game or not.

The amount of time played has nothing to do with the organizational morass of getting 40 people together. I'd rather spend a ton of time a week doing 5-10 man.

Let's look at it another way. A professional golfer can spend *tons* of time practicing by himself and be just as good as those spending *tons* of time playing in foursomes and scatter tournaments. He has that opportunity to play by himself. He doesn't *have* to play with others to get playing time in. Non-raiding PVE'ers are looking for that same opportunity. Given that opportunity, there will be those who will put in every bit as much time as hard-core raiders. Time has *nothing* to do with it.

No they can't and should not chuck in one or two new 5 man instances IMO.

Blizzard is not stupid, I am sure they kept a set of data on the frequency of dungeon accesses. ...etc

Let's take a good look at 5 man dungeons and how "tough" are they?

In beta, the gnomergan boss was a fun and tough fight, for the first wipe. It took us less than 2 wipes (total of 20 minutes) to learn the fight and perfect it. Now, running the whole dungeon took 4 hours to perfect. 4 hours of my time felt the challenge of the dungeon that the blizzard developers took at least a few months to implment.

In release, the boss fight in Uldaman took us another wipe to perfect. Another 4 hours of my time where I felt challenge, which again took the developers at least a few months to implment the dungeon.

Now let's take a look at raid dungeons, it took my guild months and months of tries to perfect MC, BWL. And we raided every week, 3-4 times a week. We spend as much time in raid dungeons as it would in 5 man instances. Look at the return value of development time vs. player time. A much better return ratio, months of development vs. months of challenge to players.

Now, if there are a mass exodus of players, for example, a drop from 5 million to 1 million subscribers, maybe Blizzard will change their focus before the expansion. However, as subscribers climb to record high, they will continue focus on what returns the most valuable of their development time, which in this case 40 man instances. This is not a should or can't, World of Warcraft is a business, and Blizzard is running a good business.

Also, there may be other constraints in developing many 5 man instances which are fundamentally against the game mechanics which Blizzard is changing in the expansion.

I don't see any reason why they can't make 5-10 man instances near that level of challenge. Gnomeregan vs. MC is not a fair comparison. Gnomeregan with only level 32's (or 31's or some appropriate level - I don't recall the level range for the instance) vs. MC *might* be a fair comparison; you can run Gnomeregan with whatever levels can get the job done. <Unimplemented top-level 10-man instance> vs. MC *is* a fair comparison, but one that we don't have.

kcma

01-11-2006, 07:36 PM

madvlad: i agree with you BUT, i think you can say that it took bliz some time to realize that only a minority of players can raid and it's certainlly easier to make the game harder by giving mobs a ton of HP than making the encounter tricky.

and you know what they say, better late than ever. i'm just happy the emphasis has switched.

Ryste: first of all, learn not to triple post. and no, you're completely wrong. requiring more man power isn't the only wya to make the game harder. that's harder busy work, not smarter working. and sorry you lack the imagination to figure out how to make the game more challenging and FUN other than giving mobs more HP to require more manpower.

and sorry again, you're completely wrong, and even bliz has realized that 40 men is NOT the way to go. you can make contents that requrie players skill and understanding of the mechanic and make it impossible to finish content without skills. and skilled play is always superior to easy content that can be finished with better gear and more content.

your arguement is like saying don't come to a race if you can't afford a Ferrari, but sorry, in a good autocross course a miata can easily turn in faster time in the hand of a skillful driver. and that's what makes the game really fun.

Ryste

01-11-2006, 07:40 PM

The amount of time played has nothing to do with the organizational morass of getting 40 people together. I'd rather spend a ton of time a week doing 5-10 man.

Let's look at it another way. A professional golfer can spend *tons* of time practicing by himself and be just as good as those spending *tons* of time playing in foursomes and scatter tournaments. He has that opportunity to play by himself. He doesn't *have* to play with others to get playing time in. Non-raiding PVE'ers are looking for that same opportunity. Given that opportunity, there will be those who will put in every bit as much time as hard-core raiders. Time has *nothing* to do with it.

A professional player of any sort with zero tournament experience or game time experience is not going to be as good as someone practice just as much as he does and play under the most extreme pressure day in a day out. This is call experience.

More time equals more practice on a particular event, particular sport. You can be driving cars all day, everyday. Truck drivers probably log in more time than Nascar drivers, give them a Nascar and ask them to go around circles for 300 times, I bet you he won't be as good as a real nascar driver.

A person transitioning from 5-10 man instances will not be as good as the top raiders doing Naxx for the past 3-4 months. Even raiders still wipe the group on new encounters, 5-10 man instance players are not better than raiders and vice versa by nature. The raiders have more time for a particular encounter, that makes them better.

It's not just the play, there are also pyschological reasons.

I don't see any reason why they can't make 5-10 man instances near that level of challenge. Gnomeregan vs. MC is not a fair comparison. Gnomeregan with only level 32's (or 31's or some appropriate level - I don't recall the level range for the instance) vs. MC *might* be a fair comparison; you can run Gnomeregan with whatever levels can get the job done. <Unimplemented top-level 10-man instance> vs. MC *is* a fair comparison, but one that we don't have.

Because a 10 man instance will be finish from beginning to end within 10 hours. 40 man instances will not get finish in 10 hours. The development time between a 5-10 man instance is not that much different than a 40 man instance. If it takes 6 months to finish a 5-10 man instance, it will also take 6 months to do a 40 man instance.

However, there difference is 40 man instance will be challenge to people for at least 6 months. 5-10 instance will be challege to people for 6 hours.

Even if you can get 40 people everyday, everytime you want to go to a dungeon, you can't pug through 40 man. 5-10 man you can. I am sure there are more than 40 people on any server that want to go to MC/BWL/Naxx at any time of the day. Why won't they pug through it? Because it's harder to get 40 people to listen than it is for 5-10 people. Are the instances harder? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is not Blizzard making the dungeon require more people, the problem is somehow, out of 40 people you don't know, or not belong in the same guild, they always screw things up.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 08:20 PM

madvlad: i agree with you BUT, i think you can say that it took bliz some time to realize that only a minority of players can raid and it's certainlly easier to make the game harder by giving mobs a ton of HP than making the encounter tricky.

Oh, I do too. I'm not really complaining. I just understand completely what the non-raiders are saying. They want more, and they're frustrated.

A professional player of any sort with zero tournament experience or game time experience is not going to be as good as someone practice just as much as he does and play under the most extreme pressure day in a day out. This is call experience.

More time equals more practice on a particular event, particular sport. You can be driving cars all day, everyday. Truck drivers probably log in more time than Nascar drivers, give them a Nascar and ask them to go around circles for 300 times, I bet you he won't be as good as a real nascar driver.

But they're playing different games. You're saying that a person doing 5 mans won't be as good doing 40 mans, but who says they *have* to do 40 mans? Who says that a golfer *has* to play tournaments? Non-tournament golf isn't golf?!? You can go golf by yourself any day. And where is this truck-Nascar comparison coming from? Of course a trucker won't be as good driving Nascar, but what does that have to do with 5-mans vs 40-mans? Your comparison doesn't fly.

A person transitioning from 5-10 man instances will not be as good as the top raiders doing Naxx for the past 3-4 months. Even raiders still wipe the group on new encounters, 5-10 man instance players are not better than raiders and vice versa by nature. The raiders have more time for a particular encounter, that makes them better.

You just said that a raider won't be as good doing 5-10 mans. That's as good as agreeing with me. I don't see why 5-10 men can spend just as much time doing challenging 5-10 man instances as raiders spend. And who says that such a person *has* to transition to 40-mans? That's the whole point!

Because a 10 man instance will be finish from beginning to end within 10 hours. 40 man instances will not get finish in 10 hours. The development time between a 5-10 man instance is not that much different than a 40 man instance. If it takes 6 months to finish a 5-10 man instance, it will also take 6 months to do a 40 man instance.

However, there difference is 40 man instance will be challenge to people for at least 6 months. 5-10 instance will be challege to people for 6 hours.

Here's the rub. I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. You're not giving any proof. You're just stating this as matter-of-fact. I disagree completely. A well designed 10-man can take just as long to master as a well-designed 40-man. It's just that they haven't given us any yet.

Even if you can get 40 people everyday, everytime you want to go to a dungeon, you can't pug through 40 man. 5-10 man you can. I am sure there are more than 40 people on any server that want to go to MC/BWL/Naxx at any time of the day. Why won't they pug through it? Because it's harder to get 40 people to listen than it is for 5-10 people. Are the instances harder? Maybe, maybe not. The problem is not Blizzard making the dungeon require more people, the problem is somehow, out of 40 people you don't know, or not belong in the same guild, they always screw things up.

No. Surely there are not. The organization required, even for a guild, is mind-numbing. This is the whole point.

Gainon

01-11-2006, 08:38 PM

However, (the) difference is (that a) 40 man instance will be challenge to people for at least 6 months. 5-10 instance will be challege to people for 6 hours.

I concede the fact that you're exaggerating the difference between the learning curve of a 40-man raid vs. a 5/10-group (at least I hope you're exaggerating), but still, c'mon: Your experience learning the obvious lack of subtleties of Gnomeregan, Uldaman, and whatnot does not necessarily predict the amount of work that would be required to succeed in a yet-to-be-implemented 5-10 man dungeon in the expansion. Past experience does not always predict future events. Especially when the rules change.

For example: Imagine a brand new, challenging 5-10 man raid that combines:
-- timed content (a la the 45 minute Baron run)
-- mobs and/or bosses that randomly possess different skills, numbers, and/or locations within the instance (not unlike the tier 0.5 arena event in BRD)

How many times would a given 5/10-man group need to run said instance, learning the pulls -- which could change in type each time the instance is reset -- and be able to succeed in a set period of time? Somehow, I think a marathon Saturday sesson wouldn't cut it for all but the most hardened of players, at least not enough to ensure getting said instance to farm status.

Now -- and here's me dreaming a bit -- consider a variation of this instance that would support two (or more) parties racing toward a common goal, with only one winner. Master that one in six hours!

What makes raiding difficult today boils down to the following:
-- Getting 40 people together with an appropriate mix of classes
-- Getting 40 people to install the required addons
-- Getting 40 people to pay attention and do what they're told
-- Not losing people as soon as they get their loot
-- Having the patience to learn the encounters and not always do the cookie cutter tactics that don't always succeed for different group make-ups

It's not a whole mess of 1337 skillz that defines a successful raider. It's tenacity, discipline, and patience -- and access to effective leadership whose expectations happen to mesh with your level of commitment to the game. That's about it.

Regarding the original point of this thread, I too am disappointed that the lion's share of new content in the last year was either raid- or grind-centric with no new small instances. But I'm also ecstatic that Blizz is going back to the less-is-more model. I'm also willing to give them the benefit of the doubt that the retooling of the game mechanics is one of the main reasons that more 5-man content didn't get released during 2006. Guess we'll see soon enough.

Ryste

01-11-2006, 08:52 PM

But they're playing different games. You're saying that a person doing 5 mans won't be as good doing 40 mans, but who says they *have* to do 40 mans? Who says that a golfer *has* to play tournaments? Non-tournament golf isn't golf?!? You can go golf by yourself any day. And where is this truck-Nascar comparison coming from? Of course a trucker won't be as good driving Nascar, but what does that have to do with 5-mans vs 40-mans? Your comparison doesn't fly.

Why won't it fly? 5 man and 40 man are different games too. A golfer can be shooting 65's all day by himself, put him in British tournament, he won't be shoot 65's. Does the golfer who plays family game get as much reward as Tiger Woods? They are both playing Golf.

You just said that a raider won't be as good doing 5-10 mans. That's as good as agreeing with me. I don't see why 5-10 men can spend just as much time doing challenging 5-10 man instances as raiders spend. And who says that such a person *has* to transition to 40-mans? That's the whole point!

Where, when and how did I say raiders won't be as good doing 5-10 man? Please point me out. Your sentences dont' make any sense.

Here's the rub. I DO NOT BELIEVE YOU. You're not giving any proof. You're just stating this as matter-of-fact. I disagree completely. A well designed 10-man can take just as long to master as a well-designed 40-man. It's just that they haven't given us any yet.

A well designed 10 man is still a 10 man, a well designed 40 man is 40 man. In a 40 man instance do you not see that you have 30 extra people.

In a 40 man instance compare to a 10 man, do you agree you need to have the extra 30 people doing the right thing instead of 10 man?

Do you agree it is harder to get 40 people say yes than it is to get 10 man?

I am without proof? It's just that they haven't given us any yet. Come on, do you seriously believe Blizzard developers are idiots and would not implement a challenging 10 man dungeon that require 6 months for 10 people to finish? You are not the first and not the last person to say "wait, give them a 10 man instance that takes 6 months to beat the final boss."

IMO, there just can't. And from the past 2 years of warcraft history, there is zero 5-10 man dungeon that takes that long to beat the final dungeon boss. (Hopefully, that's enough "proof" I need.) Because it's expontentially easier to get 10 players to do their job than it is to get 40 players to do their job. I hope you raided in both 5-10 man and in 40 man (pass MC) to see what the difference between a 5-10 man and 40 man instance is.

No. Surely there are not. The organization required, even for a guild, is mind-numbing. This is the whole point.

What exactly is the point?

Here's my point - It is not worth the development effort under current World of Warcraft mechanic configuration to create 5-10 man dungeons, because people finish the dungeon from beginning to end within few hours after release.

Sum up your point in 1 sentence I'd like to see it.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 09:11 PM

Ryste

01-11-2006, 09:15 PM

Here it is.

It is worth the development effort under current World of Warcraft mechanic configuration to create good 5-10 man dungeons, because people won't finish the dungeon from beginning to end within few hours after release.

What bases of proof do you have on this? Is there any current 5-10 man dungeon that requires months of time to complete?

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 09:28 PM

** apologies for double post **

Why won't it fly? 5 man and 40 man are different games too. A golfer can be shooting 65's all day by himself, put him in British tournament, he won't be shoot 65's. Does the golfer who plays family game get as much reward as Tiger Woods? They are both playing Golf.
I agree. Different games. But golf is golf, and I *can* get as much enjoyment out of playing *a lot* of different and challenging courses without having to enter tournaments in order to do it.

Where, when and how did I say raiders won't be as good doing 5-10 man? Please point me out.
"... 5-10 man instance players are not better than raiders and vice versa by nature ... "

/point Ryste

A well designed 10 man is still a 10 man, a well designed 40 man is 40 man. In a 40 man instance do you not see that you have 30 extra people.

In a 40 man instance compare to a 10 man, do you agree you need to have the extra 30 people doing the right thing instead of 10 man?

Do you agree it is harder to get 40 people say yes than it is to get 10 man?

I am without proof? Come on, do you seriously believe Blizzard developers are idiots and would not implement a challenging 10 man dungeon that require 6 months for 10 people to finish? You are not the first and not the last person to say "wait, give them a 10 man instance that takes 6 months to beat the final boss."
This has everything to do with organization and nothing to do with content. You are saying that they can't develop something like that. I'm saying you're wrong. They just have chosen not to up to this point.

IMO (Ed. my emphasis), there just can't. And from the past 2 years of warcraft history, there is zero 5-10 man dungeon that takes that long to beat the final dungeon boss. (Hopefully, that's enough "proof" I need.) Because it's expontentially easier to get 10 players to do their job than it is to get 40 players to do their job. I hope you raided in both 5-10 man and in 40 man (pass MC) to see what the difference between a 5-10 man and 40 man instance is.

Your proof is that they haven't done it yet. That's not proof. In fact what non-raiders are arguing is that they haven't spent the time to create them, choosing instead to create raid instances.

Here's my point - It is not worth the development effort under current World of Warcraft mechanic configuration to create 5-10 man dungeons, because people finish the dungeon from beginning to end within few hours after release.

Sum up your point in 1 sentence I'd like to see it.

Here's mine - It is worth the development effort under current World of Warcraft mechanic configuration to create challenging 5-10 man dungeons, because people will not finish the dungeon from beginning to end within few hours after release.

In other words, I believe that you are wrong. I believe that there is another way to play high end PVE content that doesn't involve gathering together 40 of your closest (your *closest*) friends. It seems that Blizzard agrees, as evidenced by the smaller instances in BC. We'll see how it works out.

Ryste

01-11-2006, 09:50 PM

** apologies for double post **

I agree. Different games. But golf is golf, and I *can* get as much enjoyment out of playing *a lot* of different and challenging courses without having to enter tournaments in order to do it.

Warcraft is warcraft, within warcraft there are different games to be play.

"... 5-10 man instance players are not better than raiders and vice versa by nature ... "

/point Ryste

What it meant was raiders aren't better players than 5-10 man instance players by nature, but a raider has more experience in 40 man instance than a player whom only plays 5-10 man instances, because raiders spend more time in the 40 man dungeon. Thus, does better in instances. You put 5 raiders in a 5 man, then put 5 non-raiders in a 5 man with equal gear. Again, I can only speak for myself, the raiders will probably come out ahead in speed and finishing the dungeon first.

This has everything to do with organization and nothing to do with content. You are saying that they can't develop something like that. I'm saying you're wrong. They just have chosen not to up to this point.

Organization is half the content. Why do guilds form in MMOs? Why do people band together in general? Why stop with 5-10 man instances, why not make everything attainable solo?

Your proof is that they haven't done it yet. That's not proof. In fact what non-raiders are arguing is that they haven't spent the time to create them, choosing instead to create raid instances.

Again, since either I or you work for Blizzard, we can't say whether they thought of it or not. But saying Blizzard for as brilliant as they are, have not thought of something like that is ignorant. But we all believe what we want.

Here's mine - It is worth the development effort under current World of Warcraft mechanic configuration to create challenging 5-10 man dungeons, because people will not finish the dungeon from beginning to end within few hours after release.

In other words, I believe that you are wrong. I believe that there is another way to play high end PVE content that doesn't involve gathering together 40 of your closest (your *closest*) friends. It seems that Blizzard agrees, as evidenced by the smaller instances in BC. We'll see how it works out.

I am glad Blizzard is making the changes. *FUTURE* changes. Has nothing to do with the current implementation of the game. How you can still make that statment is beyond me.

In any case, the 5-10 man BC dungeons will be beat within hours of release when people are in the appropriate level. Because people are already beating 5 man dungeons in 1st/2nd tries in beta. This is evident, I don't know what else is there to proof that 5-10 man dungeons can not be that difficult. You will not see people spending months before they can reach the final boss in Cavern of Time.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 09:57 PM

I'll leave it as: you believe I'm wrong, I believe you're wrong. Caverns of Time is not an end game instance. It's 66-68, not 70+.

Valas Azuviir

01-11-2006, 10:09 PM

Why wasn't any of this done in the many months since WoW first hit the stores? Why was almost every piece of content that has been patched into the game since release geared towards raiders?

Both questions really have the same answer. The material that was patched in was intended for WoW proper, it should've been already in-game before it had even gone gold. Lot of this stuff was essentially half-done already, but due to time constraints they couldn't add them.

Would it really have killed Blizz to have chucked in one or two new 5-man instances during the last year? Having spent so much time working on ZG, AQ and Naxx it's only natural that the majority who don't raid feel a little neglected. Surely some of that design time could have been spent creating a really challenging new instance for those who've been at 60 for a while and would like something new to do that doesn't involve 19 or 39 other people? Something above and beyond Dire Maul, Scholo, Strat and BRS. Could they not have taken some of the ideas that went into AQ and Naxx and downsized them for a 5-man instance?

It's a lot easier to start from scratch, than it is to alter something midway. As I mentioned above, all that stuff was already half done, it just needed spit and polishing really and that can be one of the most arduous tasks in and of itself. To then and try and downgrade everything so it can fit the 5-10 man pattern, it would've meant even more work and even further delays. Keep in mind, that part of the team was working on TBC, whereas the other half was focussing on polishing the old material, so there was a definite issue of limited manpower to get everything done.

Lot of the things, they've changed course on, it was still on the design table, afaik. (Barring the new Alliance race, and that was changed midstream apparently and it did lead to further delays.) Rough outlines for what they were planning, maybe some levelbuilds. But nothing that could not be seriously tweaked and not lead to further issues (and with issues I mean delays in excess of 4 to 6 months, as did occur with WoW proper, where the scrapping of the original graphical engine lead to a doubling of the development time).

And maybe some of the other posters are correct, maybe Blizzard changed their mind on what was proper evolution of the game and what was not. *shrugs*

All, I know for certain is that they've stated that they wanted X amount of epic 40 man instances and that they've now reached it and wish to add some more non-40 instances to help further balance things along, mayhaps with the next expansion already in mind? Time will tell.

That's all that people are saying. Don't concentrate on one part of your customer base and leave the (larger) part out in the cold.

Oh, this I can definitely agree with. Just disagree with the whole blame the raiders vs blame the casuals stuff I see beginning to brew. Which imnsho, is just a load of balderdash. Blizzard is the one designing and they really don't listen that much to what the folks are saying, oh they'll take it under advisement, but it's not the deciding factor on whether or not they're going to change something. Heck, their own Lore isn't even a deciding factor, what weight do you think we have? :wink:

Ryste

01-11-2006, 10:13 PM

I'll leave it as: you believe I'm wrong, I believe you're wrong. Caverns of Time is not an end game instance. It's 66-68, not 70+.

70+ 5-10 man will not be anything different. We'll see in January, how long those 5-10 man level 70 instances will take for people to reach the final boss. It won't be 3 months, not even 3 days.

Beruen

01-11-2006, 10:53 PM

70+ 5-10 man will not be anything different. We'll see in January, how long those 5-10 man level 70 instances will take for people to reach the final boss. It won't be 3 months, not even 3 days.

Which still won''t prove that designing highly challening 5 and 10 man content can't be done, only that they haven't done it at that time. Has the US ever had a black or female president? Just because we haven't had one yet, or don't get one come next election, doesn't mean that it's impossible and will never happen.

On the other hand, the fact that we haven't seen 5 and 10 man content as challenging as the most challenging 40 man content would indicate that we probably won't be seeing it until something changes. That change may have already happened and is leading to currently unseen content, but we've got no evidence that it has happened, either.

From what I've seen in my limited raiding vs 5 man instancing experience, the larger the raid, the more focused each player is on their primary role. My druid, in a 5 man, always has to pay attention to everything to know when to switch between healer, tank, and dps/nuking. In larger raids, I'm much more likely to be exclusively one role.

I think challenging 5 and 10 man content would require more fluid role switching, combined with the same positional or tactical battles the 40 man content currently has. There's no reason that a 5 or 10 man boss battle can't be as complicated as 40 man content. Heck, with fewer people to cover contingencies, it could actually result in being more challenging. Having one hunter who is focusing almost exclusively on pinging the boss so that everyone is more aware of where the boss is ties up, what, 2.5% of your manpower? In a 10 man, that would be 10% of your manpower, so it would be more important that the hunter continue DPSing while filling that kind of role.

O.K., I know that a hunter is never going to be doing nothing but ping the boss, but it's that kind of general idea that I'm referring to. Having the same level of complexity but with the jobs split out between fewer people means that on the average, players would have more things to keep in mind or concentrate on during a fight.

MadVlad

01-11-2006, 11:22 PM

A large part of it is probably that small group instances are more dependent on what classes are in the group. That leads to having to design the instance so that they're the same relative difficulty regardless of the makeup, which probably leads to some dumbing-down of the challenge. You can pretty much guarantee that a 40-man is going to have at least one of each class to handle the extreme specifics of any situation, so designers can remove that from their contingency planning.

teck21

02-11-2006, 03:51 AM

Ryste, '70+ 5-10 man will not be anything different. We'll see in January, how long those 5-10 man level 70 instances will take for people to reach the final boss. It won't be 3 months, not even 3 days.'

You are absolutely correct, but it won't neccessarily because of the supposed ease of 5-10 mans as opposed to the 40s.

It is because there will be hundred of thousands of groups that will be doing these as opposed to just maybe thousands of 40 man groups.

If there were as many groups doing Naxx on a daily / weekly whatever basis as Scholo or Strat, how long do you think it will take for Naxx to be cleared?

What make consistent raiders better players? And yes, I do believe that most raiders are indeed better players for alot of reasons (one of these is that they don't spend that much time LFG, and getting to the instance to have the run aborted because someone says 'I got a guild run now'). They get to spend more time actually playing when logged on, ergo more practice, better player.

And one huge big reason why alot of raiders can clear 5 mans faster than non raiders is indeed gear. Just make a quick comparison of tier 2 versus tier 0. :)

Then again, there're the raiders with insane gear I wouldn't want in my pug no matter what, because quite frankly they suck, often not even because they are bad players, but because they think they're too good to pug! And it shows. :smiley:

'Because it's expontentially easier to get 10 players to do their job than it is to get 40 players to do their job.'

This is true to a very large extent indeed, but like some others have posted, it would be even more true to put it this way,

'Because it's expontentially easier to get 10 players than it is to get 40 players.' :)

And the whole point of non-raiders is that they, for a variety of reasons, cannot get into 40 mans, or even 20s. Because of this, they get shafted in terms of gear and content, even if they are willing, and in many cases able to put in as many hours as many raides a week.

Have you tried Lord Valthalak? :)

swaldman

02-11-2006, 08:40 AM

Come on, do you seriously believe Blizzard developers are idiots and would not implement a challenging 10 man dungeon that require 6 months for 10 people to finish? You are not the first and not the last person to say "wait, give them a 10 man instance that takes 6 months to beat the final boss."

IMO, there just can't. And from the past 2 years of warcraft history, there is zero 5-10 man dungeon that takes that long to beat the final dungeon boss. (Hopefully, that's enough "proof" I need.)

A-woo! A-woo! Circular argument alert! :-)

You're saying that:

- The reason that Blizzard have not implemented a tactically challenging 10-man is that it can't be done.

- The proof that it can't be done is that Blizzard have not yet done it.

EdvinMedvind

02-11-2006, 09:07 AM

From what I have heard from the beta they complete the 5-man instances that are appropiate for their level pretty much at first go. Ofc we don't have the level 70 instances yet but I don't see it changing there.

Icefrost

02-11-2006, 09:53 AM

Is there any current 5-10 man dungeon that requires months of time to complete?
There sure would be if 5-mans would have a weekly reset timer like in 40-mans, and would take as much effort to assembly a group for as a 40-man does.
My point: 5-mans are not really much harder or easier than raids, they are just in a smaller scale, meaning it also takes a 'smaller' amount of time complete them.
What really makes it seem so exponential is the fact that there are so many more players that can do 5-mans than raiders.

Calli

02-11-2006, 11:49 AM

I sincerely hope Blizzard DON'T design 5-10 man instances where the same level of time and committment is required as if you were a 40-man raider. I don't particularly want to have to spend a month learning how to kill the second Boss in an instance and gearing up from the first Boss just so I can spend another week learning how to clear the trash to the third Boss. I can put up with that in a 40-man, but in a 5-man? Forget it.

The two types of instances are never going to be played the same way, progress in a 5-man will always be faster than in a 40-man. However, Blizz do seem to be taking some of the concepts in play in current 40-man and applying them to 5-man in an interesting way. I saw a video of a 5-man group in some BC instance where the trash mobs were using certain abiliti4es more common to 40-man raid bosses. This meant that the 5-man group couldn't just tank and spank with the trash, and had to actually use tactics and think on their feet. Now THIS is the sort of 40-man raid idea that I would want to see in BC 5-man content. Strat and Scholo with a raised difficulty level and an Outlands reskin is NOT what I want.

Morollan

02-11-2006, 12:00 PM

There's certainly been a lot of replies on this since I last looked at it. I have to say however that I totally disagree with almost everything that Ryste has posted. Others have covered much of the points I disagree with but here's a few more.

Now let's take a look at raid dungeons, it took my guild months and months of tries to perfect MC, BWL. And we raided every week, 3-4 times a week. We spend as much time in raid dungeons as it would in 5 man instances. Look at the return value of development time vs. player time. A much better return ratio, months of development vs. months of challenge to players. But that is content that only a minority of players will ever see. Devoting the majority of your design resources to a minority of your customers is not good business. I'm certainly not saying that they should not be doing large raid instances, only that they should also be implementing content for non-raiders. Which Blizzard apparently now agree with.

A person transitioning from 5-10 man instances will not be as good as the top raiders doing Naxx for the past 3-4 months. Even raiders still wipe the group on new encounters, 5-10 man instance players are not better than raiders and vice versa by nature. The raiders have more time for a particular encounter, that makes them better. It's not just the play, there are also pyschological reasons. Of course a player who is used to 5/10 man dungeons will not be as good in MC/BWL as someone who has been raiding for months. But that is entirely down to experience at those encounters. Nothing to do with the quality of the player. After a few months, they will not necessarily be better players. They will simply be better at those encounters.

And what psychological reasons?

You put 5 raiders in a 5 man, then put 5 non-raiders in a 5 man with equal gear. Again, I can only speak for myself, the raiders will probably come out ahead in speed and finishing the dungeon first. Rubbish! Put both sets of players in a brand new, totally unknown 5-man instance with equal gear and my money will probably be on the non-raiders. It's pretty much the same argument as you used against non-raiders in the previous quote I selected from you. Raiders will be better raiders than 5/10-man players, because of experience and practice at those encounters. The only reason they might be better at a 5/10 man instance is gear. Put them in equal gear then the non-raiders have just as much chance to complete an instance as the raiders, possibly even more so because they are more used to small groups and how to cope with changes in an encounter.

Not to mention the fact that, certainly in the 'lower' end of 40-man raids (MC for example) you can very easily do almost nothing in an encounter and still win cos there are 39 other people to take up your slack. Can't do that in a 5-man!

Lite

02-11-2006, 12:24 PM

Rubbish! Put both sets of players in a brand new, totally unknown 5-man instance with equal gear and my money will probably be on the non-raiders.

My experiences disagree with this, im a raider so definatly biased but every time i run a 5/10 man my guildies and people from other raid guilds that a playing alts vastly out perform any non raiders in the group. If my guildies werent that good they wouldnt be in the guild.

I'm not saying there arnt good players out there that don't raid, i just havnt seen them

Calli

02-11-2006, 12:31 PM

That could have as much to do with the difference in gear between the raiders and non-raiders. It's a lot easier for a tank with full Tier 2 to get and keep aggro than for a tank trying to complete his Valor set. In my experience the raider will try to tank with dps, while the non-raider is more inclined to tank "properly". Neither approach is wrong, the raider probably can tank with dps if everyone in the 5-man is wearing blues, but that doesn't mean he's a better player.

Morollan

02-11-2006, 12:51 PM

My experiences disagree with this, im a raider so definatly biased but every time i run a 5/10 man my guildies and people from other raid guilds that a playing alts vastly out perform any non raiders in the group. If my guildies werent that good they wouldnt be in the guild.

I'm not saying there arnt good players out there that don't raid, i just havnt seen them As Calli says, almost certainly this is due to gear. Of course a Tier 2 equipped raider will do a better job in an instance than an equally skilled player in Tier 0.5 gear. They have better armour, more health, more mana, better plus damage, higher dps etc, etc. Put the same players in equal gear and there probably won't be much difference - if anything the non-raiders would be better IMO.

I'll ignore your last sentence as I don't want to get into a flame war.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:05 PM

Which still won''t prove that designing highly challening 5 and 10 man content can't be done, only that they haven't done it at that time. Has the US ever had a black or female president? Just because we haven't had one yet, or don't get one come next election, doesn't mean that it's impossible and will never happen.

On the other hand, the fact that we haven't seen 5 and 10 man content as challenging as the most challenging 40 man content would indicate that we probably won't be seeing it until something changes. That change may have already happened and is leading to currently unseen content, but we've got no evidence that it has happened, either.

From what I've seen in my limited raiding vs 5 man instancing experience, the larger the raid, the more focused each player is on their primary role. My druid, in a 5 man, always has to pay attention to everything to know when to switch between healer, tank, and dps/nuking. In larger raids, I'm much more likely to be exclusively one role.

I think challenging 5 and 10 man content would require more fluid role switching, combined with the same positional or tactical battles the 40 man content currently has. There's no reason that a 5 or 10 man boss battle can't be as complicated as 40 man content. Heck, with fewer people to cover contingencies, it could actually result in being more challenging. Having one hunter who is focusing almost exclusively on pinging the boss so that everyone is more aware of where the boss is ties up, what, 2.5% of your manpower? In a 10 man, that would be 10% of your manpower, so it would be more important that the hunter continue DPSing while filling that kind of role.

O.K., I know that a hunter is never going to be doing nothing but ping the boss, but it's that kind of general idea that I'm referring to. Having the same level of complexity but with the jobs split out between fewer people means that on the average, players would have more things to keep in mind or concentrate on during a fight.

I am sure there were people before us who would have thought "why don't we have a female or black go for a president?" Then they do all their analysis, and find it inprobable and a waste of time and money to pick some female or black to run for president. The time is not right. Just like for WoW the past year.

It's the same concept, Blizzard thought "all these people (not sure how many, could be 1% or 2% or 90%) complain about no 5-10 man challenging dungeons. Should we implement some before the expansion?" They do their analysis, they do their cost/effect calculation. And guess what they come out with? Nope, it's not a good idea to implement 5-10 man instances before the expansion.

There are 8 classes, in small 5 man instances, there will be situations where *some* class will vastly outperform other classes. It's not that hard to have a priest shackle and heal. If you think that takes more than watch 39 other people's health bar during vael's fight or agro management pick-ups by the tanks you are wrong.

rgirty

02-11-2006, 05:09 PM

There are good players out there that don't raid, I'd like to think of myself as one of them.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:13 PM

There sure would be if 5-mans would have a weekly reset timer like in 40-mans, and would take as much effort to assembly a group for as a 40-man does.
My point: 5-mans are not really much harder or easier than raids, they are just in a smaller scale, meaning it also takes a 'smaller' amount of time complete them.
What really makes it seem so exponential is the fact that there are so many more players that can do 5-mans than raiders.

How do you assemble a 5 man group that could take as much effort as a 40 man? You are locked down to taking a certain class that makes the dungeon much easier. Some class combination will always be better at certain situations than other class.

If you designed a whole dungeon of undeads, guess what a priest shackle will make things ahell lot easier than asking druid or shaman to replace them.

If you designed an outdoor dungeon with tons of animals, taking a druid and mage will be hell lot better than taking a shaman and hunter for CC.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:15 PM

There are good players out there that don't raid, I'd like to think of myself as one of them.

There are good players that do raid.

A good player that raids, and a good player that doesn't raid. I put my money on that good player that raids out perform a good player that doesn't raid in raid instances and 5 man instances.

djiss

02-11-2006, 05:20 PM

I want to see a Naxxramas Version 10 man. Lot of wing, lot of boss, reset every 4day or week. Need lot of skill and brain, not just linear mob killing.
Some puzzle to solve could be fun.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:23 PM

There's certainly been a lot of replies on this since I last looked at it. I have to say however that I totally disagree with almost everything that Ryste has posted. Others have covered much of the points I disagree with but here's a few more.

But that is content that only a minority of players will ever see. Devoting the majority of your design resources to a minority of your customers is not good business. I'm certainly not saying that they should not be doing large raid instances, only that they should also be implementing content for non-raiders. Which Blizzard apparently now agree with.

Of course a player who is used to 5/10 man dungeons will not be as good in MC/BWL as someone who has been raiding for months. But that is entirely down to experience at those encounters. Nothing to do with the quality of the player. After a few months, they will not necessarily be better players. They will simply be better at those encounters.

And what psychological reasons?

Rubbish! Put both sets of players in a brand new, totally unknown 5-man instance with equal gear and my money will probably be on the non-raiders. It's pretty much the same argument as you used against non-raiders in the previous quote I selected from you. Raiders will be better raiders than 5/10-man players, because of experience and practice at those encounters. The only reason they might be better at a 5/10 man instance is gear. Put them in equal gear then the non-raiders have just as much chance to complete an instance as the raiders, possibly even more so because they are more used to small groups and how to cope with changes in an encounter.

Not to mention the fact that, certainly in the 'lower' end of 40-man raids (MC for example) you can very easily do almost nothing in an encounter and still win cos there are 39 other people to take up your slack. Can't do that in a 5-man!

First, how do you know only minority of the players raid? From forums? Only blizzard knows with data to back up.

Second, take MC where people can pretty much do 1 thing or nothing the entire time. You are right, but not at the beginning. That's like saying "look, people solo/duo scholo now days." 5 man is easy, you can have a group of 5 and the other 3 can AFK. YOU CAN DO THAT IN A 5 MAN.

What psychologic reason? Come on, I don't even flinch when a tank drops below 20% now days. Ask Dan Marino what to expect in the Superbowl, he won't know because he's never been there. Just like the non-raiders. Then ask Joe Montana.

It has everything to do with quality of the player, because there are guilds out there took 1 months to finish MC, and there are guilds out there that took 5 months to finish MC even if they raid the same. It has everything to do with the players.

rgirty

02-11-2006, 05:24 PM

So, basically you are saying if a person raids they are a better player than someone who does not?

Morollan

02-11-2006, 05:24 PM

A good player that raids, and a good player that doesn't raid. I put my money on that good player that raids out perform a good player that doesn't raid in raid instances and 5 man instances. Why? What does raiding do that helps in a 5-man other than providing better gear? Again, in equal gear, why do you think a raider would be any better?

First, how do you know only minority of the players raid? From forums? Only blizzard knows with data to back up. Actually, Blizz themselves have stated that only about 25% of accounts have downed Ragnaros.

Second, take MC where people can pretty much do 1 thing or nothing the entire time. You are right, but not at the beginning. That's like saying "look, people solo/duo scholo now days." 5 man is easy, you can have a group of 5 and the other 3 can AFK. YOU CAN DO THAT IN A 5 MAN. I'm sorry but I can't understand what you are saying here? Are you suggesting that you can 2 or 3-man Strat and Scholo? If so, would I be right in thinking that this is wearing Tier 2+ gear perhaps? Again - it's the gear, not the player. Put the non-raiders in the same gear and they could do the same job outside of a 40-man raid.

What psychologic reason? Come on, I don't even flinch when a tank drops below 20% now days. Ask Dan Marino what to expect in the Superbowl, he won't know because he's never been there. Just like the non-raiders. Then ask Joe Montana. Not true. I'm a dedicated 5-man player but I've been to AQ, MC AND ZG and performed just fine thank you. Raiding does not make you a better player, only better geared.

It has everything to do with quality of the player, because there are guilds out there took 1 months to finish MC, and there are guilds out there that took 5 months to finish MC even if they raid the same. It has everything to do with the players. Or maybe it has to do with the frequency of raids, the number of players available, the class mix etc. Repeat after me - Raiding does not make you a better player, only better geared.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:32 PM

As Calli says, almost certainly this is due to gear. Of course a Tier 2 equipped raider will do a better job in an instance than an equally skilled player in Tier 0.5 gear. They have better armour, more health, more mana, better plus damage, higher dps etc, etc. Put the same players in equal gear and there probably won't be much difference - if anything the non-raiders would be better IMO.

I'll ignore your last sentence as I don't want to get into a flame war.

You sounded like raiders only raid and never do 5 man. False statement.

A true statement would be - Non-raiders only do 5-10 man.

Put the equal gear on a raider and non-raider, throw them in a totally new instance. Guess what, it's not really "totally new" because there will be some raid boss abilities pass down to this new 5 man boss in a smaller scale with a twist. The raiders know by instinct the moment he sees a totem drop or a fear is coming..etc.

Playing in the superbowl just once will gain someone experience and perspects otherwise won't even if he played in the NFL for 20 years.

Actually, Blizz themselves have stated that only about 25% of accounts have downed Ragnaros.

And how many have attempted 25% attempted rag and out of that 25% all of the players beat him? Where's the link?

*Assume* the other 75% don't raid 40 man. How many of those 75% run 5-10 man instances? I can tell you I never step foot in live strat on all my characters in 2 years of playing. I am sure out of the 5 million+ accounts, I am not the only one who never completed some 5-10 man instances.

I'm sorry but I can't understand what you are saying here? Are you suggesting that you can 2 or 3-man Strat and Scholo? If so, would I be right in thinking that this is wearing Tier 2+ gear perhaps? Again - it's the gear, not the player. Put the non-raiders in the same gear and they could do the same job outside of a 40-man raid.

And it's the gear that allows people to AFK in MC. Do you think when MC first released, people go AFK in there and leech loot? what's the difference?

Not true. I'm a dedicated 5-man player but I've been to AQ, MC AND ZG and performed just fine thank you. Raiding does not make you a better player, only better geared.

AQ40 or 20? ZG is laughable, so is MC now days. Perform fine as in what? Down C'thun?

Or maybe it has to do with the frequency of raids, the number of players available, the class mix etc. Repeat after me - Raiding does not make you a better player, only better geared.

There are many variables other than frequency of the raid. And repeat after me, 5-10 man is not challenging. Not now, not in the future.

Morollan

02-11-2006, 05:42 PM

Ryste

02-11-2006, 05:48 PM

So, basically you are saying if a person raids they are a better player than someone who does not?

I am saying a raider will perform better in raid instances and non-raid instances than someone who only do non-raid instances, given equal gear.

And there are some crappy raiders out there, in general when BC is released, I will feel more comfortable knowing someone I am grouping with in the new lvl 70+ 5-10 man instances are all ex-raiders. In BC past lvl 67, you pretty much replace all gears from the old world, I'd rather group with raiders than non-raiders for PvE.

Pure speculation. You have not one shred of evidence to back up your contention that raiders are better players.

And you are not the same? Is there some sort of proof to prove otherwise?

Morollan

02-11-2006, 05:56 PM

And how many have attempted 25% attempted rag and out of that 25% all of the players beat him? Where's the link?

*Assume* the other 75% don't raid 40 man. How many of those 75% run 5-10 man instances? I can tell you I never step foot in live strat on all my characters in 2 years of playing. I am sure out of the 5 million+ accounts, I am not the only one who never completed some 5-10 man instances. I'm not getting into any arguments about whether raiders are a majority or minority of players because it is a well-established fact that they are a minority. If you don't believe me, look it up. However, assuming that x% of players do not raid, whatever x may be, I would be willing to bet that the majority of those do 5-10 man instances. The alternatives are solo-play (gets very boring, very fast) or PVP (and if you go into PVP without the gear from instances you'll get pwned until such time as you grind your way up to decent rep).

And it's the gear that allows people to AFK in MC. Do you think when MC first released, people go AFK in there and leech loot? what's the difference? Gear does not allow you to go into MC and go afk. My guild recently killed Geddon and Shazzrah for the first time (Shaz on the first attempt) with only 32 people present and with only gear that has been obtained in ZG and MC up to that point. In other words, in mix of blues and tier 0/0.5/1 gear a 40 man group can beat a raid boss on the first attempt with 20% of the group not being there.

AQ40 or 20? ZG is laughable, so is MC now days. Perform fine as in what? Down C'thun? As in do my job, not wipe the group and take down the boss.

There are many variables other than frequency of the raid. And repeat after me, 5-10 man is not challenging. Not now, not in the future. And there are many variables other than the quality of player. But you claim that this is the one that is important as you believe that a non-raider is a worse player than a raider.

And you are not the same? Is there some sort of proof to prove otherwise? You made the claim. It's down to you to provide evidence.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 06:12 PM

I'm not getting into any arguments about whether raiders are a majority or minority of players because it is a well-established fact that they are a minority. If you don't believe me, look it up. However, assuming that x% of players do not raid, whatever x may be, I would be willing to bet that the majority of those do 5-10 man instances. The alternatives are solo-play (gets very boring, very fast) or PVP (and if you go into PVP without the gear from instances you'll get pwned until such time as you grind your way up to decent rep).

That's funny you telling me I have no proof, yet you are doing the same. They are all opinions here, so it's all good. And I really disagree with you on PvP, PvP is a joke right now, and in my battlegroup, AB is 90% horde in pugs regardless of gear. I don't get my butt kick on my priest in Blues. It's your opinion that solo play is boring, it's also my opinion that people saying they love the 1-60 game are insane.

Gear does not allow you to go into MC and go afk. My guild recently killed Geddon and Shazzrah for the first time (Shaz on the first attempt) with only 32 people present and with only gear that has been obtained in ZG and MC up to that point. In other words, in mix of blues and tier 0/0.5/1 gear a 40 man group can beat a raid boss on the first attempt with 20% of the group not being there.

Because you already have the gears required to kill Geddon and Shazz. And the strategies are all over the Internet. Give me blues, me and my friends can have 4 man any instance up to ubrs. Hey that's only 80% of the people required to do the instance, the other 20% not being there.

As in do my job, not wipe the group and take down the boss.

And there are many variables other than the quality of player. But you claim that this is the one that is important as you believe that a non-raider is a worse player than a raider.

Never said they are worse. Not performing as good due to experience is different than worse. That's great you can do Shazz and Geddon with 32 people. Guess what, my friends who've been raiding Geddon and Shazz for the 1000th time will probably down Shazz and Geddon with 20 people in the same gear that you have. And please don't bring MC as a good example of raiding dungeon.

Again none of what we said are concrete statements, they are all just opinions. The easiest proof is to have 5-8 non-raiders with T2 to try onyxia see if they can. There are plenty of movies of raiders downing Onyx with 5-8 people.

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 06:18 PM

People always say all you need to raid is 30-40 people who know how to follow directions. But really the same can be said for 5 mans. You don't need 5 good players to go through the 5 man instances. You just need 1 or 2. I know I've been in situations where I've carried dead weight through places like Scholomance, Strat or DM before numerous times. And as long as they listen well enough to not make the big mistakes you can easily compensate. I know when I was newer I was dead weight at times too.

It's been ages since I've been unable to finish a 5 man because the group wasn't "good" enough... because I know the instances well enough that I can give suggestions and instructions to other people who are a bit green.

What raiding will do is force people to use skills or abilities that they never thought about before. How many mages who don't raid actually think to decurse their parties in a five man? Not many... but it's essential in a raid. How many tanks know how to trade aggro?... stuff like that. Raiding does teach you how to play in some part... when you are doing new content. Makes you think about how to handle situations on the fly that at first appear unmanagable.... Yes MC becomes Molten Bore after a certain point... but that's because you've gotten epics... you know the fights backwards and forewards and you don't need a full raid to pull em off.

Now if you join a guild that already has raid instances on farm then you might not learn jack... but personally I have learned from raiding and it's made me better in five mans as well.

oledurt

02-11-2006, 06:21 PM

I am sure there were people before us who would have thought "why don't we have a female or black go for a president?" Then they do all their analysis, and find it inprobable and a waste of time and money to pick some female or black to run for president. The time is not right. Just like for WoW the past year.

wow just....wow :afro:

Ryste

02-11-2006, 06:26 PM

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 06:43 PM

I hear exactly what your saying Ryste... Yes gear helps immensley. It's far more forgiving in MC now that when I'm fully buffed I have almost 6k life on my lock. I don't have to worried about an anihilator critting and two shotting me. And maybe it's partly due to that that I don't look forward to MC nights anymore.

Plus like you said it's real easy to comment on how easy something is when you have a blueprint. I mean big whoop your guild one shotted Shazz. Not only is he the wussiest boss in MC you had a blueprint from the internet on how to handle him. And there in lies another big difference. Raiding guilds start researching on how to fight the trash and bosses in MC before they even set foot inside... Either that or their raid leaders already have experience and know the fights. Then they explain the fight prior to it happening. That doesn't happen all the time in 5-mans.

Now let me ask you this Morralan? What do you think would have happened if you went into the Shazz fight completely cold not knowing what to expect... not knowing that you need to have your groups spread out with mages to decurse each party and that you needed to pull him into Garr's chamber? You think you still would have one shotted him with 3/4 of a raid? Not likely... he probably curses the the entire party ... then blinks into the dps and two shots them with arcane explosion.

Game over..

You have the same group who knows how to follow directions... but instead of zomgpurple lootz... you have a wipe.

kcma

02-11-2006, 06:50 PM

How do you assemble a 5 man group that could take as much effort as a 40 man? You are locked down to taking a certain class that makes the dungeon much easier. Some class combination will always be better at certain situations than other class.

If you designed a whole dungeon of undeads, guess what a priest shackle will make things ahell lot easier than asking druid or shaman to replace them.

If you designed an outdoor dungeon with tons of animals, taking a druid and mage will be hell lot better than taking a shaman and hunter for CC.

no wonder you dont have a job as game designer. you have no sense of creativity whatsoever :D

rgirty

02-11-2006, 07:22 PM

I also have a hard time believing that raiders are better players.

It might be true but where do you draw the line at "raiders"? Almost everyone lvl 60 has been to ubrs and that is a 10 main "raid".

Gealach

02-11-2006, 07:28 PM

If you have a dungeon where the ideal mix of classes is different for each boss, then it makes the instance as a whole harder because you will have to make do with a nonideal class mix for many of the encounters.

Wow, that didn't even strain my brain.

The great thing about this is that nonideal group mixes are where hybrid classes tend to shine. Currently they're underutilized.

The raiders who display the most competence are the ones in hardcore pioneering guilds who face encounters without any strat guides to follow. These are the ones that develop the strategies. They are also currently the minority of raiding guilds.

The people who seem to me to demonstrate the least competence in their class are the ones who soloed to 60. There are always exceptions tho.

Between these extreme ends of the spectrum I don't see a great deal of difference, really.

Morollan

02-11-2006, 07:41 PM

Now let me ask you this Morralan? What do you think would have happened if you went into the Shazz fight completely cold not knowing what to expect... not knowing that you need to have your groups spread out with mages to decurse each party and that you needed to pull him into Garr's chamber? You think you still would have one shotted him with 3/4 of a raid? Not likely... he probably curses the the entire party ... then blinks into the dps and two shots them with arcane explosion. And if any player walked into any boss fight in any raid or instance appropriate for their level with the same lack of knowledge I dare say the result would be the same. What's your point?

I very much doubt that either you or Ryste pioneered MC, or any other raid for that matter. If you were involved in a world first raid boss kill, then forgive me, but I doubt it. So all that happened is that you followed instructions of a raid leader and read up in a guide on the internet on how to down a boss. And that makes raiders better players how exactly? I walked into MC on the first go and killed a boss that I'd never met before. Did I suddenly become a better player? Of course not.

Nobody is arguing that raiders might be better at raiding than non-raiders. Well duh! But how that corresponds to being better at anything else has yet to be shown - and I doubt it ever will be.

rgirty

02-11-2006, 07:45 PM

This just in -

Pepsi is better than Coke, in a 6 pack instance or 24pack raid instance.

Proof yet to be discovered.

Morollan

02-11-2006, 07:56 PM

That's funny you telling me I have no proof, yet you are doing the same. No, I'm saying it's a fact. If you want to look it up, feel free. It was stated by Jeff Kaplan, designer of WoW. I'm sure you can Google, so knock yourself out.

And I really disagree with you on PvP, PvP is a joke right now, and in my battlegroup, AB is 90% horde in pugs regardless of gear. If any character on my server walked into a BG in greens and blue quest rewards (ie, pre-instance gear) he'd be murdered repeatedly unless he was incredibly skilled.

Because you already have the gears required to kill Geddon and Shazz. And the strategies are all over the Internet. Give me blues, me and my friends can have 4 man any instance up to ubrs. Hey that's only 80% of the people required to do the instance, the other 20% not being there. We have the gear that we got from that instance. The gear you are supposed to have at that level. We didn't go raid Naxx and then decide to pop back to MC for a laugh. It was our first 40 man instance so we are still gearing up.

Never said they are worse. Not performing as good due to experience is different than worse. That's great you can do Shazz and Geddon with 32 people. Guess what, my friends who've been raiding Geddon and Shazz for the 1000th time will probably down Shazz and Geddon with 20 people in the same gear that you have. And please don't bring MC as a good example of raiding dungeon. So all you're saying is that raiders are better at raiding. Which nobody is disputing. But you did say that raiders are better players and that remains completely unproven.

You put 5 raiders in a 5 man, then put 5 non-raiders in a 5 man with equal gear. Again, I can only speak for myself, the raiders will probably come out ahead in speed and finishing the dungeon first.

I put my money on that good player that raids out perform a good player that doesn't raid in raid instances and 5 man instances.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 08:05 PM

no wonder you dont have a job as game designer. you have no sense of creativity whatsoever :D

From what some people are saying, Blizzard developers don't either. But hey who cares, they are making more money than we all combine.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 08:07 PM

Gealach

02-11-2006, 08:12 PM

You apparently don't get it. Different classes may be optimal for each encounter. Unless you plan to switch classes in and out throughout the dungeon, you will not be optimal for all of them.

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 08:27 PM

I very much doubt that either you or Ryste pioneered MC, or any other raid for that matter. If you were involved in a world first raid boss kill, then forgive me, but I doubt it. So all that happened is that you followed instructions of a raid leader and read up in a guide on the internet on how to down a boss. And that makes raiders better players how exactly? I walked into MC on the first go and killed a boss that I'd never met before. Did I suddenly become a better player? Of course not.

Nobody is arguing that raiders might be better at raiding than non-raiders. Well duh! But how that corresponds to being better at anything else has yet to be shown - and I doubt it ever will be.

And no one is saying non raiders are not good players or that you will be better than all non-raiders by virtue of raiding. What's being said is raiding will make a certain individual a more well rounded and better player than that self same individual would be without it. Just like pvping will make you a better player than you would be without it.

And if any player walked into any boss fight in any raid or instance appropriate for their level with the same lack of knowledge I dare say the result would be the same. What's your point?

And I dare say you're absolutely wrong. I've never wiped on Ras Frostwhisperer for instance... I've never wiped on Cannonball Willie... I've never wiped on the Baroness in strat dead... I've never wiped on Rend... I've never wiped on a ton of bosses in 5 man instances and I went into them completely blind with no internet blueprint.

The point is ... as easy as Shazz is... without knowing what to expect prior to the fight. You WILL wipe. It's that simple... In most raid instances if you're going in cold you're gonna wipe on the first pull. That is no where near the case for 5 mans. As straight forward as MC is ... the boss fights are way more complex than 5 man bosses. And any time you are forced to learn and adapt it will make you a better player.

I agree that just because so and so's guild is in BWL they won't automatically be a better player than so and so who hasn't raided a day in his life. But he will be a better player for having been exposed to the raid content than he would have been otherwise because you will begin to incorporate other tactics that you never put into use in 5 mans prior to that. Now some of those things will be only useful in raiding but some will also be useful in other aspects of the game.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 08:29 PM

And if any player walked into any boss fight in any raid or instance appropriate for their level with the same lack of knowledge I dare say the result would be the same. What's your point?

I very much doubt that either you or Ryste pioneered MC, or any other raid for that matter. If you were involved in a world first raid boss kill, then forgive me, but I doubt it. So all that happened is that you followed instructions of a raid leader and read up in a guide on the internet on how to down a boss. And that makes raiders better players how exactly? I walked into MC on the first go and killed a boss that I'd never met before. Did I suddenly become a better player? Of course not.

Nobody is arguing that raiders might be better at raiding than non-raiders. Well duh! But how that corresponds to being better at anything else has yet to be shown - and I doubt it ever will be.

Nope we didn't, the cloest experience I had was finishing up 45 min baron run in 2nd try when it first came out. It takes practice, practice makes people better.

Practice in raid dungeons make raiders better in instances, make them think faster on a new encounter whether it's 5 man or 10 man or 40 man. Even it's as simple as following "instructions". It's a form of discipline. I am not going to say raiders are better at anything else, because some raiders aren't good in PvP at all. You can read all you want about the chrommagus fight in BWL or the Nefarion fight, but unless you practice it you aren't any good at it. And the abilities used by those bosses will be scale down in some form in the new BC dungeons to fit 5-10 man, raiders who seem it will adapt it faster than non-raiders.

Raiders have done and still do 5-10 man instances, plus experience they get from 40 man dungeons.

Non-raiders have only done 5-10 man instances, minus experience they get from 5-10 man dungeons.

That alone makes raiders better at instancing.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 08:33 PM

You apparently don't get it. Different classes may be optimal for each encounter. Unless you plan to switch classes in and out throughout the dungeon, you will not be optimal for all of them.

I get exactly what you are saying, what you don't get is if there are 5 bosses in a dungeon and each of them require different optimal class encounter.

out of that 5 encounter if there are 3 encounters that would require a similar setup, then picking classes that's geared for optimizing those 3 encounters will be better than picking classes to optimize 2 encounters.

There's always a way to optimize a dungeon when you only have to choose 5 out of 8 classes. There always.

Gealach

02-11-2006, 08:37 PM

No, you don't get it.

Many setups are made optimum by ability, not class. Its not a plugin architecture like raids.

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 08:37 PM

I'm not big on the the whole Optimal class thing. I've done scholo with no tank... and with a self healing tank before. It mainly depends on the players. But at the same time there are places like Strat Dead... where having a mage for the Baron to AE the skeletons before he uses his dark pact ability makes the fight infinitely easier.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 08:53 PM

No, you don't get it.

Many setups are made optimum by ability, not class. Its not a plugin architecture like raids.

And since different class has different abilties, there will be classes that's more suitable for a certain dungeon by making it easier.

djiss

02-11-2006, 09:28 PM

Put the equal gear on a raider and non-raider, throw them in a totally new instance. Guess what, it's not really "totally new" because there will be some raid boss abilities pass down to this new 5 man boss in a smaller scale with a twist. The raiders know by instinct the moment he sees a totem drop or a fear is coming..etc.
I teamed with T2 Mage who can't manage their aggro without KTM and breaking his own sheep with his AoE... not once... almost all the time. Guess what? I prefered to invite that mage in T0 who know what he do than that epic geared raider who prolly got geared while he was afk half the raid, cuz anyway, there is 39 other player to do the job.
And raid is often, stand still, mash 2 button. I felt asleep in MC before a boss and awake like 30 sec before he died. No one saw it. Too much people.

When you say "2man scholo", I guess you know those guy do that when they are geared... no point to try that in green/blue huh?

We downed Onyxia with 28 players. The fight ir still the same as if we were 40, no diference, same boss, same phase transition, same dance to execute. Do we succeed because we were more skilled or du to the fact we are almost all epic geared instead of blue? Du to the fact our tank have now twice HP/Armor, our healer heal are twice effective so cost less mana, our DPS'er can do twice DPS so the boss die faster leading to a tank receiving less hit, so less damage, less need to heal, so no point to bring 40 player anymore if we want some challenge....

I don't see any difference with 2man scholo...

Gealach

02-11-2006, 09:29 PM

No, you still don't get it, but I'm not going to bother trying to explain it another way.

Another way to make 5 person instance encounters more difficult is to make them less predictable tho.

With 40 man raids you can have plenty of all the classes, and you can assign people to basically do the same thing over and over again. When something goes wrong enough, the main virtue in a raid is to wipe quickly for another try.

In a 5 person group, when something goes wrong a rogue can go offtank a mob that's beating on the priest, or a mage can notice a warlock getting low on health and frostnova so the warlock can back out and drain some life back. These actions require that the players play in more than one mode.

I contend that the only class that really gains much skill in raids is the warrior. Raid decursing requires no real skill since raiders just use decursive. Completing the Benediction quest (intended to be a solo endeavor) or the Rokh'delar quests (also inteded to be solo) are much more indicative of skill for the respective classes than wearing tier 2 shoulders.

djiss

02-11-2006, 09:30 PM

And since different class has different abilties, there will be classes that's more suitable for a certain dungeon by making it easier.
10 man dungeon let you invite 1 of each class + 1 sub of any class more desirable for that encounter... find something else.
If we count build, 20 is ok.

That why I enjoy 20 man raid, easier to find 20 than 40, with better loot than 5man.

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 10:10 PM

I teamed with T2 Mage who can't manage their aggro without KTM and breaking his own sheep with his AoE... not once... almost all the time. Guess what? I prefered to invite that mage in T0 who know what he do than that epic geared raider who prolly got geared while he was afk half the raid, cuz anyway, there is 39 other player to do the job.
And raid is often, stand still, mash 2 button. I felt asleep in MC before a boss and awake like 30 sec before he died. No one saw it. Too much people.

When you say "2man scholo", I guess you know those guy do that when they are geared... no point to try that in green/blue huh?

We downed Onyxia with 28 players. The fight ir still the same as if we were 40, no diference, same boss, same phase transition, same dance to execute. Do we succeed because we were more skilled or du to the fact we are almost all epic geared instead of blue? Du to the fact our tank have now twice HP/Armor, our healer heal are twice effective so cost less mana, our DPS'er can do twice DPS so the boss die faster leading to a tank receiving less hit, so less damage, less need to heal, so no point to bring 40 player anymore if we want some challenge....

I don't see any difference with 2man scholo...

I would argue that Onyxia is actually easier with 28 than with 40.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 11:09 PM

I teamed with T2 Mage who can't manage their aggro without KTM and breaking his own sheep with his AoE... not once... almost all the time. Guess what? I prefered to invite that mage in T0 who know what he do than that epic geared raider who prolly got geared while he was afk half the raid, cuz anyway, there is 39 other player to do the job.
And raid is often, stand still, mash 2 button. I felt asleep in MC before a boss and awake like 30 sec before he died. No one saw it. Too much people.

When you say "2man scholo", I guess you know those guy do that when they are geared... no point to try that in green/blue huh?

We downed Onyxia with 28 players. The fight ir still the same as if we were 40, no diference, same boss, same phase transition, same dance to execute. Do we succeed because we were more skilled or du to the fact we are almost all epic geared instead of blue? Du to the fact our tank have now twice HP/Armor, our healer heal are twice effective so cost less mana, our DPS'er can do twice DPS so the boss die faster leading to a tank receiving less hit, so less damage, less need to heal, so no point to bring 40 player anymore if we want some challenge....

I don't see any difference with 2man scholo...

Not every raider is a good raider, not every non-raider is a bad raider. There will always be exceptions. I don't really care for the addons personally, but if addons make some people better, than by all means use it. Such as threat meter. It's out there by Blizzard rules.

Onyxia is easier with less than 40 in all my experiences. Again, people bringing MC as the example of raid dungeons where people can ride the tail coat of others should take a look at BWL, AQ40 and Naxx.

Ryste

02-11-2006, 11:17 PM

10 man dungeon let you invite 1 of each class + 1 sub of any class more desirable for that encounter... find something else.
If we count build, 20 is ok.

That why I enjoy 20 man raid, easier to find 20 than 40, with better loot than 5man.

I don't see 20 man pugs of non-raiders regularly clearing ZG and AQ20. Do you? It's not an argument of enjoy or not enjoy, you might enjoy it, others maynot.

Question in hand is why isn't there more 5 man dungeons in the past year for non-raiders?

Answer is simple: Blizzard didn't do it. Whether it's because a waste of development resources, impossible, or whatnot. We have to ask Blizzard for that. The fact is clear, without catering toward the non-raiders, Warcraft is gaining momentum and not losing customer base. They are doing something right.

No way will I think 20man+ raid dungeons would seize to appear in BC and beyond.

oledurt

02-11-2006, 11:18 PM

My main is a 60 mage. I have raided with him before. Prior to that like most I did the standard BRD/LBRS/UBRS strat and scholo runs many times. What made me good in a raid group was not my lvl of experience in that particular raid. What made me good was knowing my role as a mage very well. I learned my role as a mage by soloing a lot of different mobs on my way up to 60. I learned the value of my more obscure spells as I leveled up. The biggest and most important thing I learned as a mage was, not how to DPS but how to survive encounters. I learned different spell chains for different scenarios. I tried many different builds, and learned to play them all. I did all that before I stepped into MC for the first time.

I think some players who Power level up to 60, duo there way to 60, or group the whole time fail to really learn the totallity of ther class. Raids require a deep understanding of your class. I think that raiding can defenitly improve your skills and make you a better player, but I also think that the best raiders were already good before they got there epic gear.

In one guild I became a part of...in order to get in you had to solo an elite of your lvl successfully That is a good indicator of whether you have the skill to handle the uber endgame mobs. In my world as a mage there is a huge difference between the frost bolt spamming AOE'r crowd, and the Mage who understands the value of conserving mana,controlling agro, using decurse, dampen magic. using wands when appropriate, counterspelling, sheeping appropriate mobs, resheeping...etc

:afro:

Ryste

02-11-2006, 11:20 PM

Oatmealsmurf

02-11-2006, 11:35 PM

Gealach

02-11-2006, 11:59 PM

No encounter is inpredictable in a MMO. Except PvP, even in PvP as your experience grow, you will see that rogue who just stunned you would run more than 8 yards away so if you are a priest stop spamming that fear button when that happens.

The RAND() function says you're wrong.

oledurt

03-11-2006, 12:01 AM

I don't see this as accurate whatsoever because how you survive as a mage solo is to kite mobs that hit hard... how you survive as a mage in a group (if you pull aggro presumably off the tank) is to run towards the mob in order to take him back to the tank. Running away and/or kiting as you normally would solo will often get yourself killed and possibly cause a wipe. I'm sorry I see it every day when we get new members who are new to raiding as well as the guild.

How you play solo is way different than how you play in a group for almost all classes...

not really...you dont have enough armor or hit points to run most endgame mobs anywhere. You are dead before you take 2 steps. Your best bet is to frost nova the mob in place and hope it doesnt get resisted then blink away from it and let your tanks pick it back up and re-sunder it. If that isnt feasible then strafe is your friend.

The key is to not run away from the tanks carrying the mob/boss with you

The mistake is that you pulled him off your tank to begin with. I will give you this though...learning to manage your aggro at least as a mage is something you learn in groups, you learn that when you do your first instance. :afro:

kcma

03-11-2006, 08:50 AM

Ryste: i guess you missed the news that there will be no more 40 men. in there place will be tougher and more challenging 5/10/25 men raid.

40men isn't working, get over it.

Dutchgrass

03-11-2006, 09:44 AM

I could put effort and time in a long winded post, but this thread already has too many of those.
I'll just pick a quote that is similar to what I think.

I agree that just because so and so's guild is in BWL they won't automatically be a better player than so and so who hasn't raided a day in his life. But he will be a better player for having been exposed to the raid content than he would have been otherwise because you will begin to incorporate other tactics that you never put into use in 5 mans prior to that. Now some of those things will be only useful in raiding but some will also be useful in other aspects of the game.

Ryste

03-11-2006, 05:40 PM

Ryste: i guess you missed the news that there will be no more 40 men. in there place will be tougher and more challenging 5/10/25 men raid.

40men isn't working, get over it.

I am glad Blizzard is making the changes. As the topic is focused on the current game and the past year, it was working for Blizzard and Warcraft. Do you see subscriber alerts anywhere indicating Warcraft failed?

Whether they will put out 40 men raids after the initial expansion release, none of us know.

Ryste

03-11-2006, 05:46 PM

The RAND() function says you're wrong.

You learn the Rand() in CS101 or what?

You have 5 million+ subscribers running thousands of dungeons a day, how many RAND() patterns are you going to put in a dungeon boss to make it different each time?

DiabloII used RANDOM dungeon map generator, guess what. After awhile, all maps look the same.

djiss

03-11-2006, 07:10 PM

I agree that just because so and so's guild is in BWL they won't automatically be a better player than so and so who hasn't raided a day in his life. But he will be a better player for having been exposed to the raid content than he would have been otherwise because you will begin to incorporate other tactics that you never put into use in 5 mans prior to that. Now some of those things will be only useful in raiding but some will also be useful in other aspects of the game.
Thank man to support my point. :wink:
Having brain make you a better player, a better raider.

You learn stuff from BWL not because you raid, because the difficulty was put there and it happened it was a large raid.
In fact, many strat in Large raid can be applyed but why bother? just dps and hope he die quick.

We can learn a lot in 5man but people don't bother to because it's not needed, battle are too straight foward. They only began to change that in 20man and BWL but never in 5man.

I like the Jin'do fight, you need to watch the area. If a totem drop, all on it, if you see shade, kill them, THEN dps the boss. And that fight can easily be redo in a 10man way.
I really like the Chromagus fight, once again, can be done in a 5-10 man way too.

Blizzard had many nice idea of fight, the bad thing is they ONLY included them in large raid instead of putting them in small raid too.
But now, we suppose to have it in TBC.

Note, I want to point out I prefered using the word Small/Large Raid instead of Casual/Raider Player. I thing those word fit better to describ the 2 side of the discussion and are the real term to use. It's not casual player who can't raid, it after BRS/Scholo/Strat/DM, their is nothing to do in small raid.

djiss

03-11-2006, 07:19 PM

DiabloII used RANDOM dungeon map generator, guess what. After awhile, all maps look the same.
Yup, they look-like the same but when you create the game session, you don't know what will be the path. You arent sure you get the same path the next time you'll come. And there random map generator was poor, only because of the limited set of map part to put together and the way to put them togheter.
Not hard to solve a 20 pieces puzzle, once you know the piece. Not the same when you have 2000 pieces to put togheter.

Gealach

03-11-2006, 08:03 PM

Not to mention that an encounter is not a map. THey are not comparable at all. Your analogy fails.

A random function determines what items from a loot table will drop currently. Care to bet money on exactly if and what green any given random mob will drop?

A map layout doesn't determine anything but route. A randomized encounter is very different.

rgirty

03-11-2006, 08:47 PM

Gealach

03-11-2006, 09:10 PM

Given that I prefer non-raid content but don't see any reason to log in between Naxx runs, I'd say there isn't enough non-raid content for me at least. Having a beta key keeps me going tho, even tho I know I won't be able to keep my beta characters.

Increasing subscriptions means new people, experiencing the existing content, combined with folks not being willing to quit before they at least see what WoW 2.0 is like. The expansion is casting a pall on raid content tho, at least for gear. Found a green quest reward belt at level 60 that pwns the arcanist belt yesterday. I don't really feel like running AQ40 anymore, as I'm bored of bugs. Naxx is still interesting, but I don't know how long that will last.

Oatmealsmurf

03-11-2006, 09:20 PM

That's true raiding right now really doesn't serve much purpose in terms of loot. I find myself not wanting to run certain instances any longer because they have become routine and boring but most times I do anyway if I'm needed because it's kinda rude to the people who enabled me to get my fun out of it by running but haven't gotten their fill.

The only thing I really look forward to anymore is AQ 20. And that kinda serves a dual purpose... farming books to sell to people too impatient or ignorant of the fact that they'll be able to train the new ranks for themselves soon enough. Trying to stockpile as much gold as possible in prep for the flying mount costs.

djiss

03-11-2006, 09:31 PM

So, are we basically arguing that there isn't enough non raid content?

Kinda got derailed into a debate over if people who don't raid are as good as people who do?

Sorta confused...I think the skyrocketing rate of subscribers is a good indication that more people are enjoying this game than not.
Raid can be maxed to 40.
But you need only 2 player to form a raid. There is small and large raid. 5/10/15 is small, 40 is large. UBRS is a raid dungeon. If it's easy and boring at a point you don't even count it as a raid dungeon... IMAGINE those who are also fed up of it but don't do 40man raid.

I don't want your freaking epic purple who have like 4str/6sta over my ****.
I want more small raid dungeon I can do with my 4/9/14 other buddy.
Is it hard to understand?
We don't want the same boring dungeon we made in the last 2 yr with only 1-2 new boss we can summon.

Now blizz give us what we want, and who complain now? OMG, NO MORE 40 MAN /cry

Gealach

03-11-2006, 09:31 PM

farming books to sell to people too impatient

Happy you're getting some use out of those books then. =) The first thing I did when I copied my 60 mage over to beta was train all the spells that used to be in books. New ranks of frostbolt, fireball, arcane missile, and even cinny buns.

No turtle poly tho. You'll still need to run ZG for that.

rgirty

03-11-2006, 10:00 PM

I think I get it now.

You want more casual content? 5 man and 10 man dungeons?

You believe in the past year that you haven't been given enough of these?

I think free content in patches has been exceptional, I still think they have a very successful business model the way it is.

Much more successful than EQ that released new content all the time, and charged you for it.

djiss

03-11-2006, 11:20 PM

I think I get it now.

You want more casual content?

Get over it with thet casual word, it's already proved casual player can raid.
read carefully
SMALL RAID CONTENT :grin:

You believe in the past year that you haven't been given enough of these?
No, nothing since Dire Maul.
But large raid got BWL, ZG, AQ20, AQ40, Naxx

I think free content in patches has been exceptional, I still think they have a very successful business model the way it is.
I can give you a trip to North Pole. Even if it free, you don't care, specially if you wanted to go in France and the plane had Air France writed on his side.

Note : When I don't do 40man raid (yes yes, I do some) I like to do small one too. Diversity FTW. But I'm bored of what we have.

Gealach

03-11-2006, 11:24 PM

Umm, Djiss, I don't think rgirty was arguing any particular point. He was just trying to understand what this thread was supposed to be about, given that it got hijacked.

djiss

03-11-2006, 11:26 PM

I'm just answering his question, with answer frm my point of view. I hope he don't think I'm flaming him. :)

rgirty

03-11-2006, 11:32 PM

Yeah, it appeared you were flaming me pretty good there. I was just curious as to what the discussion was basically about.

I don't do 40 man raid content either, and would like to see more 5 man type stuff myself.

I was just curious as to what was actually being discussed with all the hijacking.

Trepidation

04-11-2006, 07:29 PM

djiss

06-11-2006, 03:26 PM

rgirty

06-11-2006, 04:09 PM

No problem djiss :D

djiss

06-11-2006, 04:40 PM

I think the real meat of the heat is "A small % of the players got a large % of the new content in the past 12 months". While it is fun to live vicariously through their FRAPS videos as they spend 40+ hours a week on it because they can get 40 people together...it sure would be fun to spend 40 hours a week on somthing new with 4-9 of my friends.

Yeah exactly, I enjoy large raiding stuff but the game was lacking of new small one.

Actually, it like being forced to organize/signup to a big Golf Tournament when you just want to do a small foursome with friend by that sunny sunday morning.

kcma

06-11-2006, 08:07 PM

4somes are haaaaawt <3 am i invited?

djiss

07-11-2006, 07:16 PM

Why not. If we get more people, let convert to raid and reserve a whole 18hole

amgyn

08-11-2006, 12:42 AM

Aerath

08-11-2006, 01:04 AM

Is there any point at all left to this thread or shall I just lock it ?

Morollan

08-11-2006, 01:52 PM

people need to understand that you cant please everybody.

blizzard is trying to please the majority of players (good business practice), which just happen to be raiders. so they concentrate their efforts in pleasing them.

complaining about lack of updates for non-raiders will get you nowhere untill non-raiders are the majority of the population. As previously stated, raiders are the minority, not the majority. That is why the Blizzard fixation on raid content flew in the face of business sense and why the change in direction in the expansion makes sense.

Calli

08-11-2006, 03:29 PM

Maybe this will put it into perspective.

Here I am with my mage. Can't face the idea of going into Molten Snore ever again. Nef's been on farm for months, Ossirian and Hakkar are just loot dispensers. C'thun is on technical farm status (down twice so it isn't a fluke), and we've got three bosses down in Naxx. AQ40 after Huhuran is still something of a challenge, but it's starting to become a drag. Naxx is still challenging, but... well... I'm starting to get bored of raiding all the time and want to do something every now and then when I log on that doesn't involve stocking up on raid mats and wiping on new bosses in Naxx.

What the hell can I do? Bugger all that's meaningful in a five man, since the last five-man instance Blizz released was Dire Maul, and I'm kind of over-geared for there. The one bone that was tossed at the feet of the non-raiders was the 0.5 armour upgrade quest line, and this was a very good thing for them, even if it's clearly not enough. For raiders who want to do something other than raid every once in a while there is.... pvp or nothing.

So yes, it's NOT been a very good year for non raiders. It's been a great year for raiders.... provided they want to do nothing but raid. I'm very happy that Blizz have chosen to redress this imbalance with the Burning Crusade, doing something new that doesn't require 39 others there to do it with you is a good thing in my book.