PDA

View Full Version : Tier 14 in Mists of Pandaria to have mini tiers in itself!



HybridBloodsZak
07-30-2012, 10:25 AM
A recent interview with Ion Hazzikostas and Scott Mercer this was revealed

"Mists of Pandaria will also include two other raids which we plan to make available a few weeks after launch... Both of these instances are a higher tier than the Mogu'shan Vaults and are designed to be tackled using gear obtained in the Vaults, which is why we plan to make them accessible a few weeks after launch"

(http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/) Blizzard Insider 45 - Mists of Pandaria - Raid Preview for link

I find this very interesting because by guiding players in a direction they want them to tackle the content

1. It won't be nearly as intimidating when choosing which of the 16 bosses of this tier to tackle first
2. Raiders will have an actual cohesive story in a tier(Yes they've done this in other tiers but not to the extent as this tier
3. Players will not get burnt out on these raids as fast as previous tiers hopefully which will give Blizzard more time to work on the raid content for future patches.

What do you guys think?

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 10:36 AM
I like it simply because it's..... PROGRESSION.

Do Raid A first..... then go into Raid B.

This just takes me back to the old BC model in a way though. Heroics are going to get old in some way because.... guess what.... they're the same bosses those players have already beaten. I kind of hate to say it, but I'm beginning to agree with the old school crowd in a way in that, "valor points" might have "ruined the game".

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:30 PM
The problem is even if raid b is s posed to require gear from raid A. People will still attempt raid B. And find ways to do it in the least amount of gear as possible, the only real way to implement this is attunement quests.

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 12:39 PM
@ Leet.....
If players are good enough to do Raid B in sub-Raid A gear.... hey, props. That's what you get for being He-Man. For the regular Joe Average WoW-Player, they'll probably benefit more from running A, then B.

Though.... I'll play devil's advocate for a moment here....
If you're running Raid B in "suboptimal gear", then you're really not doing "everything you can to optimize yourself" and make your toon the best it can be to ensure success. That is one of the common arguments and things I hear in regards to players not having the best enchants/gems etc.... AND in opposition to "turning the buff off".

So, I say no. No attunements. If you really are Billy Badass and able to roll Raid B without Raid A gear.... more power to you. But then, don't whine about there "not being enough content". Oh.... and lastly.... it'll be a few weeks later anyway.... so those who would be stomping Raid A will likely be done with it already by that point anyway.

Edit: Attunements.... such a fun topic. It's like many other things.... some people want these things to apply to everyone else, but not themselves.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:44 PM
Without attunements:

1)Top Guilds kill 2-3 bosses in Raid A, then kill Boss 1 of Raid B
2)Every other guild thats 2-3/X in Raid A starts attempting Raid B
3)Massive QQ
4)Raid B gets early nerfs

With Attunements
1)Top Guilds QQ, but not opening b/c hey attunements are back
2)Attunements work
3)Massive QQ
4)No nerfs because people are complaining about the order of bosses that bosses need to be killed in.

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 12:48 PM
Almost...... I'm adding my edits in bold....


Without attunements:

1)Top Guilds kill 2-3 bosses in Raid A, then kill Boss 1 of Raid B
2)Every other guild thats 2-3/X in Raid A starts attempting Raid B
3)Massive QQ
4)Raid B gets early nerfs

With Attunements
1)Top Guilds QQ, but not opening b/c hey attunements are back
2)Attunements work
3)Massive QQ
4)Due to massive QQ over attunements, Blizzard removes attunements again.
5)Raid B still gets nerfed because it's the easiest way for Blizzard to fix it and respond to QQ.


You have waaaaaaaay too much faith in the community.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:48 PM
NO I WANT ATTUNEMENTS

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:53 PM
I mean in the end it all will be nerfed, but I like the idea of a repeat of t8 (Naxx/Sarth/Mally, just not Naxx). Sort of like we had in T11 (a gear tier mind you), but have To4W be unlocked by defeating nefarian, and the ability to Summon Al'Akir unlocked by defeating Cho'gall.

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 12:55 PM
I'd like to see attunements back also. Or at least a "I graduated from t14 A" certificate, showing one's level of competence.

There are so many factors and variables that play into this though, I just don't see Blizzard being able to implement an attunement without making it something fairly.... easy.

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 12:55 PM
Naxx was T7, and I don't remember any attunements... I'm confused. Also there's already going to be different raid instances open (4 of them I think) at release, then I guess 2 more a few weeks later now?

I will say that I'm not a big fan of "HERE'S 16 BOSSES YOU CAN DO ANY OF THE FIRST 12 WITHOUT DOING ANY PREVIOUS ONES" like... wtf WHERE DO I GO BLIZZARD. I'm really okay with kill this boss then this boss then this boss then this boss kinda stuff.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:56 PM
Naxx was T7, and I don't remember any attunements... I'm confused. Also there's already going to be different raid instances open (4 of them I think) at release, then I guess 2 more a few weeks later now?

I will say that I'm not a big fan of "HERE'S 16 BOSSES YOU CAN DO ANY OF THE FIRST 12 WITHOUT DOING ANY PREVIOUS ONES" like... wtf WHERE DO I GO BLIZZARD. I'm really okay with kill this boss then this boss then this boss then this boss kinda stuff.

The key to summon malygos was dropped from sarth

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 12:56 PM
I mean in the end it all will be nerfed, but I like the idea of a repeat of t8 (Naxx/Sarth/Mally, just not Naxx). Sort of like we had in T11 (a gear tier mind you), but have To4W be unlocked by defeating nefarian, and the ability to Summon Al'Akir unlocked by defeating Cho'gall.

And how would you handle the transition to t12 from there?

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 12:57 PM
@Leucifer. Attune nothing. Just let the transition happen. Attunements between raid instances (within the same tier) in my opinion help with story telling and create a story behind bosses, it makes relations instead of

3 different camps of baddies are doing something bad AT THE SAME TIME!

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 12:59 PM
Fair enough.
You realize though, that this would almost not even be an issue for two whole tiers of Cata then?

Edit:

I hate to say it, but I think we're going to see the established LFR/Normal/Heroic with ever increasing buffs/debuffs being the model going forward. Yes.... tier14 might have an extra super tier... a t14+ if you want, but it'll be subject to the whole "block" model that we've seen since ICC.

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 01:03 PM
I'm kinda worried about the debuff nerfs... with so many bosses, will they even give non-HC guilds a chance to complete the content before they start nerfing shit?

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:04 PM
The gating method from ICC will likely never be done again. And the way its being implemented will likely only give 2 extra bosses in the t14+ tier, which has always been done in past few tiers going back to 10. Lich king functioned as a t10+, every end boss of the tier gave a couple extra ilvl's the then primary tier, so I feel it won't be game breaking having a t14+ on LFR/N/H

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 01:05 PM
I'm kinda worried about the debuff nerfs... with so many bosses, will they even give non-HC guilds a chance to complete the content before they start nerfing shit?

They can always turn them off......

Edit: I can see Agg twitching at that suggestion.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:06 PM
I'm kinda worried about the debuff nerfs... with so many bosses, will they even give non-HC guilds a chance to complete the content before they start nerfing shit?

Doubtful, they didn't in t11.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:08 PM
They can always turn them off......

No, no you can't. That is the dumbest argument ever. Unless there is separate achievements for doing it with the buff off there is no reason what so ever to turn it off. There is no way to prove you did with with the buff off unless you start totalling damage from logs.

Turning off nerfs just hurts your own position in where ever you are. My arguement has always been if your concerned about nerfs then kill it before it is nerfed, if you can't then your the reason it was nerfed.

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 01:09 PM
No, no you can't. That is the dumbest argument ever. Unless there is separate achievements for doing it with the buff off there is no reason what so ever to turn it off. There is no way to prove you did with with the buff off unless you start totalling damage from logs.

Turning off nerfs just hurts your own position in where ever you are. My arguement has always been if your concerned about nerfs then kill it before it is nerfed, if you can't then your the reason it was nerfed.

EXACTLY.

Thank you.

If it really is that big of a matter to you to do it without the nerf, then do it. Otherwise, you just weren't good enough to do it fast enough.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:10 PM
Thank you.

/Internet Fist Bump

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 01:11 PM
there is an achievement for doing the bosses without the debuff on.

Fetzie
07-30-2012, 01:11 PM
No, no you can't. That is the dumbest argument ever. Unless there is separate achievements for doing it with the buff off there is no reason what so ever to turn it off. There is no way to prove you did with with the buff off unless you start totalling damage from logs.

Turning off nerfs just hurts your own position in where ever you are. My arguement has always been if your concerned about nerfs then kill it before it is nerfed, if you can't then your the reason it was nerfed.

There will be a feat of strength for killing bosses either before the debuff goes in, or with it disabled.

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:11 PM
there is an achievement for doing the bosses without the debuff on.

In Mop? o.o

Bovinity
07-30-2012, 01:12 PM
There is no way to prove you did with with the buff off unless you start totalling damage from logs.

Well, if the buff is something that appears on the players, there would be a definite lack of said buff on the logs, wouldn't there?

Theotherone
07-30-2012, 01:13 PM
Blizzard, just give me raids with some new art and interesting fights to prove to me that your not just going to reskin everything and push some junk out the door and I'll be happy, I could care less about kill order (if you want to do one or two bosses like Sinestra or Mally that have prerequisite kills, fine). 5 months of DS has made me not want to ask too much.

Turn off any nerf/buff, as one of the posts said above there will be Feats of Strength for killing the bosses with nerf/buff turned off.

Leucifer
07-30-2012, 01:13 PM
there is an achievement for doing the bosses without the debuff on.

I can support this...........

Besides. It's not like Blizzard has gone to the effort of saying "OK!!! Timer's running! You have 8 weeks to kill before we debuff by 5%! GO!"


Blizzard, just give me raids with some new art and interesting fights to prove to me that your not just going to reskin everything and push some junk out the door and I'll be happy, I could care less about kill order (if you want to do one or two bosses like Sinestra or Mally that have prerequisite kills, fine). 5 months of DS has made me not want to ask too much.

YES!!!! THAT!!!

leethaxor
07-30-2012, 01:13 PM
Well, if the buff is something that appears on the players, there would be a definite lack of said buff on the logs, wouldn't there?

Currently in dragonsoul since the buff is applied on entry it doesn't appear on boss in logs. So you have to sit there and manually add the bosses health. That or I screwed up my log filters last night :x

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 01:19 PM
I still think the FOS is bullshit. What there should be is an FOS for whatever debuff % you originally cleared it at, and a separate, regular, achievement for doing it without the debuff on. To me, that's the only way to encourage people to kill the boss without the debuff FIRST, before over gearing it with later gear and coming back and doing it some day and calling it a feat of strength.

Theotherone
07-30-2012, 01:41 PM
I still think the FOS is bullshit. What there should be is an FOS for whatever debuff % you originally cleared it at, and a separate, regular, achievement for doing it without the debuff on. To me, that's the only way to encourage people to kill the boss without the debuff FIRST, before over gearing it with later gear and coming back and doing it some day and calling it a feat of strength.


This would lead to the question of where would you draw the line as to average gear level of the raid so that they would not have over geared it? With the stat inflation, if you had everyone in raid in 1/2 current tier gear, you're pretty much on the downhill slope to overgearing regular modes. I don't think it's possible to cut the diamond as fine as you'd like.

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 01:46 PM
This would lead to the question of where would you draw the line as to average gear level of the raid so that they would not have over geared it? With the stat inflation, if you had everyone in raid in 1/2 current tier gear, you're pretty much on the downhill slope to overgearing regular modes. I don't think it's possible to cut the diamond as fine as you'd like.

I'm so confused, what does this have to do with anything? If you get a Feat of Strength that says what % you killed the boss at first (since you can't tune down the debuff, only turn it off), then whatever % that is (because it's a first time kill only achievement) delineates how serious you were about it. If it's a first time only kill, the relative "gear-flation" you can get is limited to what bosses you are capable of killing. The "overgearing" is due to loot you get from bosses you wouldn't have already killed.

Theotherone
07-30-2012, 01:54 PM
I misunderstood what you were saying at first, re-reading it a few times I get it now. I was thinking you wanted a FoS for bascially not outgearing and I couldn't see how that would work. However, if I understand correctly, it would be one regular achievment for no debuff (no matter when you kill it) and an FoS for first kill with the percent debuff. Makes sense.

Aggathon
07-30-2012, 01:57 PM
yup, exactly!

Sharku
07-30-2012, 02:04 PM
If this FoS thing for killing stuff pre nerf or with the nerf switched off is going to be a thing for this upcoming tier and future tiers, wouldn't the Herald of the Titans style achievement getting players to "kill it with no gear equipped with higher item level than is available on normal mode" work? Or am I missing something here?

Theotherone
07-30-2012, 05:06 PM
yup, exactly!

I was a little burnt by the time I read it, was reading software licenses all day.

Lysiander
07-31-2012, 09:46 PM
Regarding Attunements, The whole purpose of the concept is to:
a.) Keep the first wave entry at a controlled pace.
b.) Ensure that people do not enter the raid utterly undergeared/ unprepared.

Neither of these actually requires killing the endboss, just the gearcheck bosses. Knowing that, I never understood why Blizzard doesn't just make dynamic attunements. Say you have Raid A required for Raid B. Raid A drops itemlevel x and B drops itemlevel y. Just make a quest that requires either killing the Endboss of A or the accumulation of a certain amount of itemlevel x to complete. Either way, you ensure that people have some experience in Raid A as well as the gear to actually tackle Raid B.
Then just make the attunement go bye bye once new content deploys. And introduce a new attunement for the current content. Rise repeat.

Takethecake
08-01-2012, 11:44 AM
No, no you can't. That is the dumbest argument ever. Unless there is separate achievements for doing it with the buff off there is no reason what so ever to turn it off. There is no way to prove you did with with the buff off unless you start totalling damage from logs.

I thought they said they were adding a feat of strength for completing raids without the nerf buff active.

EDIT: apparently I fail at seeing a second page for this thread.