Cataclysm Raid Progression Refinements - Page 2

Warbler · 04/26/10, 5:53 PM

Originally Posted by swills

This.

I think it's clear that Blizzard is leaning towards positioning WoW as a game that doesn't require you to login every day in order to get the most out of it. We've heard other speculated changes along these lines such as the replacement of the 'Daily Heroic' with something that resets less frequently. This definitely seems like an conscious decision on Blizzard's part.

Remember too that they have Starcraft II out in 2010, and presumably Diablo III sometime in 2011. I could definitely see some types of players thinking "I'll have to drop WoW when DIII comes out" but if WoW only takes up two nights a week, then it becomes much easier to play both. It seems like a pretty shrewd business move to me.

Have we, as a society of gamers, gotten to a point where we need the video game company we pay to help us control the amount of time we play? If you (not you, the collective you) can't control the amount of time you play without their influence, then you have more problems than this potential disaster.

As per your extended point, as I posted before, this does smell like a business move, either because they have more games coming out in the future, or, as I stated previously, because the title is aging and Blizzard has decided to move it's money elsewhere. In either case, I'm not amused. I played this game because I had multiple options in which to play it. Severely limiting those options does not make me want to continue buying their product.

• Chicken · 04/26/10, 6:03 PM

Originally Posted by Ellyh

Correct. There should be no circumstances under which you kill a boss more than once per week on the same character. However, in the same way that you can decide on a per-boss basis whether to try normal vs. hard mode, we might allow you to change between 10 and 25 on a per-encounter basis for additional flexibility. If you started a raid in 25-player mode and then found that you couldn’t get everyone together later in the week, you might be able to downsize the next few bosses to 10-player.

This comment from the blues fills me with dread. I see this as being way way to suceptable to abuse and drama and causing no end of heartache for guild leaders. Assuming they can really tune difficulty to be identical then you should be staying with your existing raid size for the entire week.

It also rather misses what it's aiming for. If you're lacking people to continue as 25-man later on in the week, it's rarely the case that you're anywhere close to only 10 people being there, the actual amount of people you have will be around 20 most of the time when there's people missing. If there's but a single raid ID those people can enter, you have to make hard decisions on who to leave out. So you can downsize so you can raid even when you don't have 25 people there, but you can't actually take everyone likely to be there with you.

If they want to make such downsizing options viable they'll have to look into changing how raid IDs work. There's just too much trouble involved at a guild management level if you have to fit twice as many people as you can fit into a single 10-man ID. That is of course also ignoring any issues caused by tuning being off.

Baervar · 04/26/10, 6:35 PM

Originally Posted by Chicken

It also rather misses what it's aiming for. If you're lacking people to continue as 25-man later on in the week, it's rarely the case that you're anywhere close to only 10 people being there, the actual amount of people you have will be around 20 most of the time when there's people missing. If there's but a single raid ID those people can enter, you have to make hard decisions on who to leave out. So you can downsize so you can raid even when you don't have 25 people there, but you can't actually take everyone likely to be there with you.

If that's one of the main purposes with this change then I'm really not sure how they'll be able to pull it off. In the scenario of trying to continue a 25 man while having some people missing, balancing raidbuffs/synergies in two 10 man groups will be a nightmare if 10 mans will have the same difficulty. And even if more buffs would be given to more classes for better 10 man compositions, then hybrid classes will most likely be left behind in 25 mans since the bulk of the needed ones will be brought in by a better combination of fewer players.

I think having more content with more flexibility in how it can be continued would be good in practice (provided they can get over the balancing factor I've shown my fear of). Raid content's probably being eaten through faster than even Blizz thought and they're trying to make sure they can put enough out there to satisfy everyone's needs, while giving it more diversity as well. And having different items for every type of raid/HM's + making HM's trickier to active would most likely slow down the process of feeding us new content.
I'll most definitely miss the Ulduar way of activating HM's and the HM loottable-style. It seemed a lot more neat and well-thought, as much as simplifying some things may help in providing demanded gameplay it's taking a way a lot of what made some things stand out even more, at least for me.

Katria · 04/26/10, 7:06 PM

Originally Posted by Tinwhisker

As like is said here, gear isn't the real barrier to completing content and hasn't been for quite a while. 10man raids are inherently easier to organize and hand pick raiders from and thus have a higher probability of success. And as for balancing difficulties, I defy anyone to tell me that Putricide's Malleable Goo or Lich King's Defile is just as hard to deal with in 10man as it is in 25man. Thus 10man will always be easier both logistically and mechanically; give 10man the same gear with an equal chance to get it and it becomes the preferred method.

Yes 10 man raids are easier to organize and have FAR less loot drama in my experience. But, does 10 man have to always been easier? I disagree.

Compare 10 man ToGC with 25 man ToC. Or 10 man ICC heroic with 25 man ICC normal. The 10 man versions in both cases are definitely harder. So there is no question that 10 man content can be harder than 25 man content, it's all in the tuning.

Yes, in the above examples the 10 man version has mechanics the 25 man version does not, but in both cases the 10 man fights are mechanically harder. There is no reason, actually, that the mechanics have to be exactly the same for both fights.

And, actually, look at a fight like Rotface. I'd say here's a fight that actually favors a 25 man team: less of your raid is running around dealing with slimes at any one time compared to 10 man. When you get down to 6 second slimes in 10 man more more than 1/2 your raid is running around dealing with slimes all the time.

I agree that mechanics like Malleable Goo and Defile are harder on 25 man currently. But what if Blizzard changed things around: 10 man Putricide has a much smaller room to run around in. 25 man Lich King has a large hit box so melee have more wiggle room to run away and drop defiles, or have defile have a longer cast time in 25 man than in 10 man.

There are ways to even the odds. And it must also be remembered that current 10 man ICC is balanced around 251 gear, and most people clearing it have 264+ gear. So you have a gear advantage, and the fights are not balanced around having all buffs available (25 man is balanced around having heroism, 10 man is not...with hero being shared with more classes in Cat, it may be part of the balance in 10s).

So no, I don't agree that 10 man will always be easier, and I think current raid content proves that 10 man bosses can be harder than 25 man bosses, though you have to compare 10 man hard mode to 25 man normal. However, when you consider that 10 man hard mode is balanced around using 25 man normal ilvl gear, then really that becomes a more fair comparison than 10 man normal to 25 man normal.

kalbear · 04/26/10, 7:40 PM

Yes 10 man raids are easier to organize and have FAR less loot drama in my experience. But, does 10 man have to always been easier? I disagree.

Compare 10 man ToGC with 25 man ToC. Or 10 man ICC heroic with 25 man ICC normal. The 10 man versions in both cases are definitely harder. So there is no question that 10 man content can be harder than 25 man content, it's all in the tuning.

Yes, in the above examples the 10 man version has mechanics the 25 man version does not, but in both cases the 10 man fights are mechanically harder. There is no reason, actually, that the mechanics have to be exactly the same for both fights.

Yes, you can make a 10 man fight harder. Or easier. This isn't hard. The best example for an apples to apples comparison is Sarth3D 10 man vs 25 man.

The question isn't whether you can make one harder or easier. The question is whether you can make them exactly the same difficulty. Or close enough that it won't matter. You can tweak and poke and do all sorts of things, but at the end of the day these things are largely subjective, tested by a small elite group of players and testers, and are almost never, ever right early on. Think about all the patch changes to encounters blizzard does - and those are to tune the specific difficulty for only one facet. Now they have to balance against each other and overall difficulty AND raid comps and class balancing? It's a very difficult task.

Tinwhisker · 04/26/10, 7:43 PM

Originally Posted by Katria

I agree that mechanics like Malleable Goo and Defile are harder on 25 man currently. But what if Blizzard changed things around: 10 man Putricide has a much smaller room to run around in. 25 man Lich King has a large hit box so melee have more wiggle room to run away and drop defiles, or have defile have a longer cast time in 25 man than in 10 man.

Yeah, so in 25man we'd need to spread out 8 yards but in 10man you need to spread out 17 or maybe Blizzard makes the room is half the size in 10man (and the boss as well). While that might actually help with parity it would be a logistical nightmare for Blizzard that they aren't going to attempt it.

burghy · 04/26/10, 8:54 PM

Would be interesting to know what made them change stance regarding 10 man difficulty.
They invoked plenty of reasons why 10 man can't be tuned as tight as 25. How come they're confident now they'll be able to make them equally hard?

Sorran · 04/26/10, 11:21 PM

Yeah, so in 25man we'd need to spread out 8 yards but in 10man you need to spread out 17 or maybe Blizzard makes the room is half the size in 10man (and the boss as well). While that might actually help with parity it would be a logistical nightmare for Blizzard that they aren't going to attempt it.

I agree that its unlikely Blizzard will be changing room sizes based on 10 vs 25 (especially if they allow you to change from 10 to 25 in a given raid lockout), but there is definitely precedent for the same ability having a different area of affect in 10 vs 25 - consider Algalon's Cosmic Smash. The same number of actual "comets" in 10 and 25, but the drop off in damage from the impact sites was very different between the two.

I could definitely see a version of Defile in 10 man that starts out larger, or grows larger from a smaller number of damage ticks (which I assume it probably does already), or similar differences. Any ability that has a size component to its effect could, I suspect, quite trivially be made to have different size parameters in 10 compared to 25.

I think it's also noteworthy that their stated intention is to ensure "that the difficulty is as close as possible in 10 and 25 as we can achieve" - that statement gives them plenty of wiggle room to maybe have abilities that function far more differently in 10 and 25 than we are currently used to.

Axanor · 04/26/10, 11:33 PM

You fix the problem (loot quantity) by simply dropping a LOT more on 25 man relative to the size of the raid. If say, 6 items drop on the 25 man version but only 2 on the 10 man, you give people a big incentive to do the 25 man version.

I am really glad I won't have to run 2x progression runs a week. It's just too much raiding.

(which I assume it probably does already)

Indeed, it grows much faster per hit in 10 man.

Copernicus · 04/26/10, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by Blizzard

Our primary goal when approaching badges in Cataclysm is to address a lot of the confusion that comes with these currency systems. To that end we're changing badges to a more straightforward point system, similar to the ones we've used for a while for Arenas and Battlegrounds. There will be a total of four types of points you can earn in Cataclysm (two for PvE and two for PvP), and these will remain the same even as we introduce new content.

PvE
* Hero Points -- Low-tier, easier-to-get PVE points. Maximum cap to how many you can own, but no cap to how quickly you can earn them. Earned from most dungeons. (most like the current Emblem of Triumph)
* Valor Points -- High-tier, harder-to-get PvE points. Maximum cap to how many you can own, as well as a cap to how many you can earn per week. Earned from Dungeon Finder daily Heroic and from raids. (most like the current Emblem of Frost)

When a new tier of raiding gear is released or a new PvP season begins, your higher tier of points will be converted into the lower tier. For instance, if a new tier of raid gear is released, your Valor points will be converted to Hero points.

To explain the reasoning for the weekly cap on points for the higher tiers, this is to provide flexibility in how players choose to earn the points without feeling like they have to do all of the content as often as it is available. If your Valor income from raiding is sufficient, you may not feel the need to run Dungeon Finder every night, or perhaps even at all.

World of Warcraft - English (NA) Forums -> Cataclysm Badge and PvP Point Changes

I snipped the PvP stuff.

I was expecting the changes to badges, and am glad that they are implementing them in an easy to understand fashion instead of messing around with currency and strange ways to convert them. I just hope that they allow for more than one daily to allow for missing out on portions of the raids. I doubt that an alternative party/raid weekly (anything besides the dungeon daily and the weekly raid) would be attended often enough if it's easy to cap from a full raid.

Shadout · 04/27/10, 12:08 AM

Blizzard making raiding less time-consuming (but hopefully still interesting/challenging/fun).
I approve.
Blizz has been good at adjusting to the world around them, gaming becoming more casual, and maybe not least, Blizzards playerbase getting older. We are pretty damn far from EQ by now. This is just another step. And a step they ought to have taken from the start of WOTLK imo.

It will be quite a challenge to balance 10 man vs 25man though. Will have to see that happen before I believe it.

Volrath50 · 04/27/10, 12:10 AM

Originally Posted by swills

This.

I think it's clear that Blizzard is leaning towards positioning WoW as a game that doesn't require you to login every day in order to get the most out of it. We've heard other speculated changes along these lines such as the replacement of the 'Daily Heroic' with something that resets less frequently. This definitely seems like an conscious decision on Blizzard's part.

Remember too that they have Starcraft II out in 2010, and presumably Diablo III sometime in 2011. I could definitely see some types of players thinking "I'll have to drop WoW when DIII comes out" but if WoW only takes up two nights a week, then it becomes much easier to play both. It seems like a pretty shrewd business move to me.

Furthermore, it's easier to retain a player, and to regain a former player than it is to get a new one. Over five years have passed since the start of the game, and players have aged. Someone who started in high school isn't going to have as much time now that they are in college/university. Someone who started when they were single in college isn't going to have as much time now that he's got a full time job, a wife and a child.

My brother quit WoW two years ago when he went to university, because (rightly or wrongly) he felt he no longer had the time to raid. He'd like to come back, and if Blizzard gives the impression of less play time needed to raid (something TBC style split tiers might do), he's pretty likely to come back.

Grogzor · 04/27/10, 1:03 AM

What I want to know in regards to the difficulty of 10 mans, are they going to assume that you have the maximum assortment of buffs that you can for 10 man? Or are they going to assume some lesser number? Because if it is the maximum, the raid is essential pigeonholed into bringing these certain classes/specs and if it is some lesser number, then the content can be made less difficult by stacking the raid. Something Blizzard has tried to minimize drastically.

One big difference between 25 mans and 10 mans now are the number of things that can temporarily remove somebody from the fight. 25 man Marrowgar you have 3 Bone Spikes, 10 man you have 1. The reason behind this is if both of your healers got it, you would wipe pretty fashionably. Maybe they can make them more on par by creating some game logic where only one healer at a time could get affected by these?

fr0d0b0ls0n · 04/27/10, 3:11 AM

Valor Points -- High-tier, harder-to-get PvE points. Maximum cap to how many you can own, as well as a cap to how many you can earn per week. Earned from Dungeon Finder daily Heroic and from raids. (most like the current Emblem of Frost)

If Badges = Valor Points, and considering a weekly cap, and different number of valor points per raid size:

For example, 2 Valor Point per boss in 10man, 5 Valor Point per boss in 25 man.

a) Weekly Cap <= 44. A 10man raider can get to the cap doing every daily and every boss (15 at launch). A 25 man raider can get to the cap without doing all bosses on 25man or daily heroics.

b) Weekly Cap > 44 & <= 89. A 10man raider can't get the cap even doing all the stuff. A 25 man raider can get to the cap doing enough content, and get VP gear faster. Almost 100% faster if the cap is near the high end.

c) Weekly Cap >89 (not probable). A 25man raider can't get to the cap doing all the stuff.

What option is the best? Can be frustrating to 10man players (not enough VP per week) or 25man players (getting more VP per boss doesn't have a point).

Furion · 04/27/10, 3:42 AM

Assuming blizzard is smart they will balance the amount earned in 10man in a way that forces you to do daily heroics regularily and balance 25 man in a way that saves you most of that trouble once you can clear the current content. Saving effort in daily heroics could be another incentive for going through aditional effort organising 25 man raids. I don't think tweaking these numbers right is hard.

Actually I have quit wow numerous times and the main reason has always been that it takes too much of my precious time if I want to do PvP and PvE on a challenging level along people with equal skill. I expected wotlk to solve this issue but it turned out I had to run 10 mans (which I prefer, but there were no 10 man guilds on my server, which I expect to change in cataclysm) to prepare for 25 man every week meaning I had to raid just as much as before or even more to be in a good guild. This might finally allow one to spend a reasonable amount of time in wow and still be somewhat hardcore so if blizzard gets it right this time it is exactly the change I have been waiting for since vanilla.

And if they get the 10 vs 25 man balance right that might finally allow players to have a free choice on what they prefer. I think it's possible.