+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 58

Thread: The Weekly Marmot - Cataclysm Tier 1 vs ICC

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,380

    The Weekly Marmot - Cataclysm Tier 1 vs ICC



    Follow Lore on Twitter or Facebook!

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2
    I wouldn't mind a gating system say where, the raid is split up into wings, and instead of killing the end boss of the dungeon and getting acess to the hardmodes, say if you kill the last boss in a given wing, then you can do the hardmodes for sed wing.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,380
    Quote Originally Posted by cjbuddy09 View Post
    I wouldn't mind a gating system say where, the raid is split up into wings, and instead of killing the end boss of the dungeon and getting acess to the hardmodes, say if you kill the last boss in a given wing, then you can do the hardmodes for sed wing.
    That'd be a welcome way of doing things in my opinion as well, but that doesn't seem to help with what his complaint was: the sheer quantity of raid content required more time than he liked.

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    Yeah as a fairly serious/progression player who fancies himself able enough for any top 100-500 guild I LOVE this tier of content more than any I've played yet (which is all except for the last half of BC). That said I can definitely see how the 1-50s and the sub 10,000 guilds must hate it.
    RIP Stormrage Horde ('05 - '11). Turaylon Horde since 11/11 where there's actually people
    GM of Neolutum (always recruiting, PM me)

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2
    I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for players who are whining that they lost their lives because the game had TOO much content. That's what the purpose of the game is; it is not blizzards responsibility to make sure players step away from the game to get some fresh air and exercise every once and a while.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    284
    I still fail to see where this "whining" and asking for sympathy stuff is coming from.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazeyonoma View Post
    That'd be a welcome way of doing things in my opinion as well, but that doesn't seem to help with what his complaint was: the sheer quantity of raid content required more time than he liked.
    How much of that though would be sped up by having earlier access to heroic loot? With a kill endboss to open a wing of hardmodes, heroic loot would be obtained quicker and for the best players in the world, that would be a huge help. They're not going to be decked out in full heroic loot, but a few pieces here and there, for the margins they're playing at... that would be huge.
    An introduction into WarTanking (no longer updated as I've retired from WoW - the concepts will still be mostly accurate but the numbers no longer will be.) - http://www.tankspot.com/showthread.p...101-The-Primer

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Kanzer View Post
    I still fail to see where this "whining" and asking for sympathy stuff is coming from.
    This.

    Many top guilds have made similar comments. I think the core of the issue is actually relatively simple: so long as there is ONE guild willing to devote massive amounts of time to progression, the only way there can be any semblance of competition is for some restriction of content or for other guilds to also devote similar amounts of time.

    Ultimately, WoW is a competitive game. In fact, you'd have to work pretty hard to find any multiplayer game without competition, and even single player games offer forms of competition with speed runs, or points, or secret coins, or what-have-you. The only reason WoW goes beyond beating your friends at Smash, or Halo, and the reason there are websites that track which guilds are the best guilds in the world is because people want to know this information... so in a way, it's a problem that extends far beyond the top 10 guilds or so. Wowprogress doesn't exist because of the top 5 guilds. MMO-Champion doesn't report world firsts so that the 15 or 20 guilds going for those firsts can see who got it. We, as a community, are interested, and this has encouraged an even stronger spirit of competition amongst these guilds.

    That doesn't necessarily mean all these top guilds are gunning for notoriety, as some people seem to think. Honestly, I doubt Method cares one bit whether or not people read their website. However, notoriety is not the same as accomplishment; the satisfaction in gaining a world first isn't a sense of superiority, but a sense of accomplishment. It's really satisfying to put a large amount of work, creative thinking, and practice into something and succeed at a competition. This applies to both WoW and the real world. To suddenly be presented with a staggering increase in the effort required to be one of those world-first guilds, combined with increased pressure by larger numbers of competitive guilds, no doubt frustrates and exhausts those players that want to remain competitive.

    This is a playstyle choice that actually is outside that of the individual players and guilds. We all play this game for our own reasons. Some of us play because we enjoy playing with friends. Some people play for gear. Some people like the story, some people enjoy the challenge, and some players enjoy the accomplishment. We're dealing here with players who enjoy the accomplishment of high-end raiding and world firsts. The choice here isn't between "being in a top guild" or "being in a lower ranked guild," rather it's "being in a top guild" or "not playing at all." When the time investment becomes severe enough that the effort outweighs the achievement, I agree with Method in thinking that there may be a problem somewhere along the line. There's a question as to whether or not this problem is a result of our community or if instead the blame lies with blizzard, but it's still a problem and worthy of consideration.

    It's true that players could simply opt out of this competitive environment, but if that's an enjoyable part of the game, they may instead opt to voice their opinions on how to improve the game. In the end, that's all this is. These players will still be going for world firsts whether or not changes are made, so I honestly don't see a problem with trying to devise a system that is slightly less time-intensive.

    I do still think that world firsts should require large time investments, but surely there can be a middle ground between the awful gating systems of Coliseum and ICC and the extreme breadth of content available in Cataclysm. It is worth noting in this discussion that Cataclysm has presented the largest amount of endgame content ever available at a single release.

    In the end, we can choose to create divisions in the World of Warcraft community by drawing these arbitrary lines of casual, hardcore, world first, etc, or we can all work together and respond to one another as players and communicate openly and effectively to improve gameplay for ALL members of the community. Maybe this is a little too kumbaya, but imagine the power we could have if we worked together, rather than chastised players for having different priorities. Imagine if we came to this issue NOT from the perspective of wanting to "pick sides" based on this guild's ranking and status, but instead coming together and wondering if they might have a point.

    To which I ask you: At any level of play, should a video game require a larger time investment than real life to remain competitive? I think the answer is no. If this is the case, then we either need to reestablish what it is that defines a competitive guild and a world first, or hope that blizzard does this for us. In the end though, I'm convinced that this is a problem inherent in our community, not only at the top.


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    Quote Originally Posted by Papapaint View Post
    clipped
    While I believe your entire post is very well thought out and written I think you need to be careful in suggesting anything that would negatively impact the other 75,000 raiding guilds in any way. If a gating system can be put in place that would *only* affect the top 25 guilds and make it a bit easier for them to have some breathing room while progressing, fine. However making changes that negatively affect, in any way, the rest of the community to suit those top 25 guilds is a step backwards. I know this is not what you were directly suggesting but it is a potential result of anything they do to assist the plight of the top 25 guilds.

    I personally LOVE the current tier of content and strongly hope that they continue to be this challenging. The only point I will concede is that perhaps the barrier to entry is a bit high. Perhaps one of the three dungeons should have been specifically tuned to be moderately easier so that the truly casual could have a chance to get down 2-4 bosses in a reasonable amount of time. I sincerely hope hardmodes remain this hard and I sincerely hope end-bosses remain this technical. I say that with only experience on 3/13 HMs so perhaps I'm overstepping a bit but I'm extremely satisfied with the challenges so far as they make the sense of accomplishment that much more significant.

    So again if a gating system *must* be erected to prevent the top 25 or even top 50 guilds from breaking themselves on the content then all I ask is that whatever system is devised be set at a high enough level so as to have a net zero effect on the rest of the guilds who are not in the world first hunt. Why negatively affect them at all since the system isn't really being implemented to benefit them.
    RIP Stormrage Horde ('05 - '11). Turaylon Horde since 11/11 where there's actually people
    GM of Neolutum (always recruiting, PM me)

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by feralminded View Post
    So again if a gating system *must* be erected to prevent the top 25 or even top 50 guilds from breaking themselves on the content then all I ask is that whatever system is devised be set at a high enough level so as to have a net zero effect on the rest of the guilds who are not in the world first hunt. Why negatively affect them at all since the system isn't really being implemented to benefit them.
    I would agree wholeheartedly. I think ICC's gating system was awful for this reason.


  11. #11
    When the time investment becomes severe enough that the effort outweighs the achievement, I agree with Method in thinking that there may be a problem somewhere along the line. There's a question as to whether or not this problem is a result of our community or if instead the blame lies with blizzard, but it's still a problem and worthy of consideration.
    Maybe the fallacy here is that people are making the assumption that Blizzard has any intention whatsoever of catering to guilds that are bound and determined to play tremendous amounts of time to consume the content as quickly as possible. I think MMO history has shown us that no matter what the designers do, there will be players willing to sacrifice anything to "win".

    I can't speak for them, naturally, but there seems to be this underlying assumption that Blizzard has some intent and/or responsibility to do something to particularly cater to this very, very exclusive style of play and for all we know they simply have no intention of doing so, they just want to get the content out there and let people enjoy it at whatever pace they wish.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity View Post
    Maybe the fallacy here is that people are making the assumption that Blizzard has any intention whatsoever of catering to guilds that are bound and determined to play tremendous amounts of time to consume the content as quickly as possible. I think MMO history has shown us that no matter what the designers do, there will be players willing to sacrifice anything to "win".

    I can't speak for them, naturally, but there seems to be this underlying assumption that Blizzard has some intent and/or responsibility to do something to particularly cater to this very, very exclusive style of play and for all we know they simply have no intention of doing so, they just want to get the content out there and let people enjoy it at whatever pace they wish.
    Except Blizzard caters to ALL of its players. I don't see why we should exclude any sect of players from this. That's the whole purpose behind a company that owns the largest MMO franchise in the world--to cater to multiple styles of players.


  13. #13
    Except Blizzard caters to ALL of its players. I don't see why we should exclude any sect of players from this. That's the whole purpose behind a company that owns the largest MMO franchise in the world--to cater to multiple styles of players.
    But not at the expense of other players, and releasing less content or gating it or other artifical little blocks for the sake of a miniscule little handful of players that otherwise cannot control themselves seems extremely counterproductive. The general consensus from the community seems to be that the amount of content and the ability to enjoy it at your own pace has been a great success overall.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity View Post
    I can't speak for them, naturally, but there seems to be this underlying assumption that Blizzard has some intent and/or responsibility to do something to particularly cater to this very, very exclusive style of play and for all we know they simply have no intention of doing so, they just want to get the content out there and let people enjoy it at whatever pace they wish.
    I can't speak for blizzard either but one point that Papa Paint made very well was why the top guilds are in fact important to the community ... as clearly they are. At least amongst say the top 5000 world guilds (which to be honest is approximately the top ~5% of guilds, so certainly not everyone by any stretch), these top 25 or 50 guilds are VERY important. What they do dictates what/how we'll do things when our turn comes in the following weeks.

    Now there's plenty of evidence to suggest that at the very least blizzard appreciates the top guilds for their play-testing skills. Blizzard retuned Nefarian after Paragon had their way with him and they apparently had developers present actively changing the Sinestra encounter between pulls for Paragon. So whether Blizzard cares about their larger impact on the community or not (and I'd have to assume they do), they certainly appreciate and respect what they do to their bosses.
    RIP Stormrage Horde ('05 - '11). Turaylon Horde since 11/11 where there's actually people
    GM of Neolutum (always recruiting, PM me)

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    284
    With each tier of content blizzard has tried more and more to find a way to cater to all of its players, Cataclysm is no different. Some ideas weren't received so well, some of them were liked in principle but were missing alittle something. In my eyes they are getting closer and closer to coming up with something optimal, but the only real way is through trial and error and see what the player base says.

    Lore did a fantastic job of going over different ideas and possiblities of what can come next.

    He also brought up an amazing point in that the only way these types of guilds can exist is because of the long breaks they get inbetween tiers of content.

    All in all theres a difference between whining/blaming and voicing/sharing your opinion or point of view on something. Speech, tone of voice, word usage...its also the difference between constructive criticism and berating. It does matter, and makes a difference.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity View Post
    But not at the expense of other players, and releasing less content or gating it or other artifical little blocks for the sake of a miniscule little handful of players that otherwise cannot control themselves seems extremely counterproductive. The general consensus from the community seems to be that the amount of content and the ability to enjoy it at your own pace has been a great success overall.
    But the general consensus isn't always correct, and the entire point of my post was that we need to open a route of discussion to try to determine a way to accomplish an improved situation WITHOUT it being at the expense of other players.

    Say, for example, BWD was the only raid to be released at launch, with BoT and TotfW available at two later points. Even right now, there would be only a handful of guilds that had run out of progression content in BWD. Had BoT been opened, say January 14th, tip top guilds could have had some lovely time off, most of the high-end guilds would still be progressing on 3-5 day/week schedule, and the average playerbase still would only be a few bosses into hardmodes.

    I'm not suggesting that this is anything close to an ideal situation, but it does illustrate that it's possible to gate the high end without stifling the progression of the lower-ranked guilds.


  17. #17
    Say, for example, BWD was the only raid to be released at launch, with BoT and TotfW available at two later points. Even right now, there would be only a handful of guilds that had run out of progression content in BWD.
    But this defeats the idea of having all the content available for everyone to consume at their own pace, and having a great variety of content for people to enjoy.

    Had BoT been opened, say January 14th, tip top guilds could have had some lovely time off
    This is actually one of the big points of contention...they can have all the time off they want. There seems to be this feeling that they're somehow forced into spending the maximum amount of time playing the game, and that's just not the case. If they want to be an extreme gaming guild that puts an incredible amount of time into the game, that's great. But lets not suggest that it is anything but their choice.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Karlsruhe/Germany
    Posts
    3,906
    Perhaps a different way of solving "too much content, too little time", would be to limit boss access by time, but allow access to all bosses (except endbosses or those with pre-requisites). Over time you could unlock the possibility to kill an extra boss or two. So the first ID in you can kill four bosses. Which four you kill is completely up to you (except bosses that have pre-requisites you cannot unlock. When you have filled your "quota" for the ID you can up your cap by two, opening up two of chimaeron, maloriak, atramedes, V&T, Ascendent council, council of wind or Al'akir. When you have killed these 5 bosses, whichever you choose inside of an ID, you get two more. Each time you complete your quota you can increase your allotted boss kills. So for 12 bosses of content you would need 5 weeks to unlock it all. Heroic mode would be engage-able from day 1 like in ulduar, but the chances of success would be rather slim without the gear from normal modes.

    HOWEVER, using an extended raid lock you could go for nef in the second ID (you kill at least magmaw, omnotron in the first ID), as they would still be dead in an extended raid lock. This would lead to an interesting race for world firsts - do you go for broke and keep the reset with a dead worm + golem council or do you reckon that in the long run it is better to farm gear for heroic mode. The guilds who win the normal mode race would not necessarily be the ones getting the heroic mode world/region first kills.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, VA
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity View Post
    But this defeats the idea of having all the content available for everyone to consume at their own pace, and having a great variety of content for people to enjoy.
    Which is why I used it as an example for gating that doesn't impede the PROGRESSION of lower guilds at the cost of higher guilds, and even CONCEDED that "I'm not suggesting that this is anything close to an ideal situation". You completely ignored my final sentence. What if instead I'd said that end bosses weren't available until January? I don't think a single guild under the top 300 or so guilds even got to see those bosses, let alone kill them.

    My point is it's POSSIBLE to come to a solution that can appeal to all players. That's all WoW has been doing since release, is transforming into a game that IS appealing to all players. That's why there's 12 million people playing. Some of those people are competitive. You clearly aren't, and you're downright dismissing the opinions of those players who are.

    This is actually one of the big points of contention...they can have all the time off they want. There seems to be this feeling that they're somehow forced into spending the maximum amount of time playing the game, and that's just not the case. If they want to be an extreme gaming guild that puts an incredible amount of time into the game, that's great. But lets not suggest that it is anything but their choice.
    They can not have all the time off they want and still enjoy the aspect of the game they most enjoy. Again, if you read my first post, you'd see that I agree with everything you say right here, but also think there is room for discussion on how to improve this model. If you're not interested in helping the discussion beyond "I don't like it when top guilds bring up issues with the game", then I have no option but to dismiss you as closed-minded and unwilling to foster discussion.

    I'll ask you directly: what is so offensive about a top guild having an opinion on the amount of time they had to spend to remain a top guild AS OPPOSED to the amount of time they had to spend on previous tiers of content? If your answer is "because they're a top guild and choose that," please remember that no other expansion or patch release has had even a remotely similar amount of available endgame progression content at a single time. If you can not answer this question without an ad-hominem about the players themselves or their choices, then your problem is bigotry, and you need to reconsider whether or not you are actually okay with anyone enjoying the game the way they enjoy playing this game.


  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Marina del Rey, CA
    Posts
    3,003
    u mad bro?

+ Reply to Thread

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts