The Weekly Marmot - The Casualization of Hardcore Raiding

[Theotherone]

I, again, wasn't going to say much more than I already have...but this seems like a spurious argument to me.

People didn't quit when they brickwalled against h-Rag. They didn't even quit back in TBC when Kara was really hard and Mag was almost impossible. The people likely to quit ARE the hardcore people who find things too trivial...not the people who are brickwalling.

But it's not spurious. I'm going to accept Blizzard at it's word that it's tracking player progression, that when the progression curve flattens they take action to get players moving again. When a Blizz moderator comes out and says about nerf qq "deal with it, it's a game"; that's not some guy just spouting, that's the company line. So ask yourself, why? Then look at the fact that Blizz has made the end game the focus of the game, and that Blizz saw it's subscriptions hemorrhage. The need to keep the majority of the player base engaged - how do you do that, if your top end end game content, the focus of your game, is not accessible to the vast majority of your player base? You make it accessible and you steer people into the meat of your product.

So you have LFR - the casual says "hey raiding is fun, getting loot is fun"; so they graduate to normal, but hey normal is hard in a pug, so you let them start to climb the mountain and give them a boost; they complete that and then turn to the real cool stuff, with the real cool loot and get stuck, but now they've been bitten by the bug, but they've also not been privy to the bang your head against the wall until this dies way of gaming. So players now expect to that boost.

Maybe economics dictated it, but now Blizzard had given it's player base an exspectation that "you too can be the ultimate wow hero, and if you don't get there we'll give you a hand." A vicious cycle that can't be stopped at this point.

Is it right or wrong? I don't know, but it's now become an accepted practice in the game. Look, I banged my head against LK for 5 weeks, I don't know how many pulls, but it was 4 nights a week, at least, for 5 freaking weeks. But we did it; and you know, what I'd do it again and again and again; I'd submit a majority of players on this board have the same mental make up I do - failure is not an option, we'll keep going until we beat it or die trying (figuratively). Could be the stupid military mentality "take that hill. Well no sir it's just too hard" - that's not acceptable. The cold reality is most of the player base does not think like we do. The over used phase old school comes to mind.

[Leucifer]

Here's where there economics bat hits you square upside the head...... (shortened to save space)
As Blizzard has said to all the epeen, hardcore, no nerf, get better crowd get over it, it's a game - I believe that was Bashiok's response. It's not personal, it's only business.

Here's my reply to Blizzard....
"You know how you guys were once looked up to as presenting a high quality product, and being possibly THE premiere company in the video game industry, and had a fantastic reputation for making a world-class product? You know how you have recently come under fire from fans in regards to the game generally 'not being as awesome as it used to be', and all the grumblings you hear from your fanbase about how there's just something wrong with WoW? It's because you guys at Blizzard are CHASING A BUCK instead of STANDING YOUR GROUND and drawing the line on a committment to excellence."

Blizzard found that out painfully and has taken more time on D3.... but even there, you can perceive a shift towards money-grubbing versus making a really kick ass product, letting it sell, and making money based off of the awesome success of your product instead of gimmicks (D3 AH).

Unless they're really ok with the transformation. But everything comes at a price.

And this should tell some people that maybe they're really not as large a percentage of the playerbase as they think they are. If they were as large as they say, they'd have more clout. Those of us on this forum can only speculate, or look at the 'raid completion' sites, and Blizzard has already said that those aren't correct. Blizzard knows the percentages, and makes their economic decisions accordingly.

Having said that, I'm ok with no nerfs to heroics, and no sympathy.

You're probably correct about a lot of this. And I agree with the essence of your last statement. Leave heroics alone as an untarnished product. Take a damn stand for your product and leave it hard.

(Just an interesting side thought....... What would the difficulty level be if the game COULD NOT be updated? How hard would the game likely be made?)

I, again, wasn't going to say much more than I already have...but this seems like a spurious argument to me.

People didn't quit when they brickwalled against h-Rag. They didn't even quit back in TBC when Kara was really hard and Mag was almost impossible. The people likely to quit ARE the hardcore people who find things too trivial...not the people who are brickwalling.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This.
H-Rag became a thing that DROVE people. Beating it was one hell of an accomplishment, thus people pushed for it hard.

Again, we've all heard the talk about how "raiding has gone soft" compared to what it was in TBC. Fix it! Make heroic modes that place!!! Make heroic modes that spot where the kid gloves are off and there is some sort of progressive difficulty increase. I realize we can't really just got back to that, but you can bring back some of that spirit in heroic modes. Make them a "clean product".

Hell... maybe make an attunement of the sort that, you can go straight into heroic mode for a new raid tier only so long as you completed heroic mode on the previous tier. Crazy idea, but it would introduce some idea of progression back into the equation.

Okay Leuc, you have me somewhat confused because you and I advocate the exact same course of action, basically what you say is: it's about competition not about challenge.

I think it's not as black and white as that, competition is definitely a huge part of that, and the reason why it's a "non-choice" is because it's not JUST about the challenge, though that is a part of it. Competition, mindset, and pragmatism also come in to play. And the problem with flat nerfs that you can "turn off" is that it's just another advantage you can use to kill the boss. For me it's never been about loot. I just straight up do not care about loot past what it can do for me to kill a boss faster. I get loot to kill bosses, not kill bosses to kill loot. And you're right, it's really not necessarily about that challenge (wholly about the challenge) it's about seeing the boss die. If blizzard gives me an advantage to kill the boss faster, be it a better ax, epic gems, free server transfers to increase the ability to recruit better players, or a zone wide buff, I will use it. I might not like it, but I'll use it. It's the exact same mindset that hardcore raiders run LFR for "well it's there and gives me the ability to get better gear so I can be more competitive in HC modes, so I'll do it even though I don't like the fact that I have to do it since it means I'm staring the same boss in the face twice a week." Do I want to do it? No, not really, I don't find it "fun" but I WILL do it because it gives me an advantage.

Honestly, I don't care about the "nature" of the advantage, be it gems, enchants, spec, raid comp for improved buffs, or a zone wide debuff, I'm going to use the advantages to kill the boss if they're presented to me. The exploits is kind of a bad example because the only exploits that are "undetectable" that blizz hasn't technically caught/punished (see savage roar on hagara), PEOPLE DID USE!!!!! And the ones that were detectable PEOPLE STILL USE, and often get temp banned for, or in the case of AQ40, perma banned.

So I'll still use those advantages, but because I don't have the time to raid 40+ hours a week, I might not kill the boss before this random blanket nerf that seems arbitrary, and I don't like it. I'd much rather give it a few more weeks, but you're right it's NOT just about challenge, but you act like challenge isn't a part of it at all, there's several contributing factors, and some become more important than others based on the climate.

That's why it's a non-choice.

I get it Agg. you want the satisfaction of the kill. The satisfaction of triumph over what you feel is a true challenge. But doesn't it feel a little less awesome when it comes after a nerf? I'd bet you sit there and think, "I know I coulda whooped this shit without the buff."

I get the nature behind your thinking. I understand it all too well. It's the same thing that drives me to try alt specs and sometimes weird gear setups.... because I think (regardless of whether it's true or not) that there might be a better way... a way to gain an edge and overcome. Like.... maybe running my DK with strength dps trinkets might help the group push through Atramedes (which I did at times just because my survival wasn't an issue but the group was slackin' on dps). I didn't accept that concept of "I'm a tank, my dps doesn't matter." that I got from a lot of other tanks.

So, I understand your points about it being a "non-choice"..... and you understand my point that there actually IS a choice, just that, that choice goes against WoW-player nature (if not human nature). It's a set-up for failure. Both ends of that are why I STRONGLY advocate uncompromised heroic mode raids. It eliminates the "non-choice" by simply removing the option that no one is actually going to make use of anyway. Clean it up.... get rid of the false pretense. Blizzard needs to stop trying to make everyone feel good about themselves and in at least one part of the game say....




"No Mr. Bond...... I expect you to die....."

[Aggathon]

http://www.xkcd.com/123/

[truculent]

I, again, wasn't going to say much more than I already have...but this seems like a spurious argument to me.

People didn't quit when they brickwalled against h-Rag. They didn't even quit back in TBC when Kara was really hard and Mag was almost impossible. The people likely to quit ARE the hardcore people who find things too trivial...not the people who are brickwalling.

^ This.

The entire story is a hoax. smoke and mirrors.

Blizzard just got lazy, cheap, and annoying IMO.

[Leucifer]

Blizzard just got lazy, cheap, and annoying IMO.

Lazy, cheap, and annoying..... hmmmm. Who does that remind me of?

[Zoltar]

I, again, wasn't going to say much more than I already have...but this seems like a spurious argument to me.

People didn't quit when they brickwalled against h-Rag. They didn't even quit back in TBC when Kara was really hard and Mag was almost impossible. The people likely to quit ARE the hardcore people who find things too trivial...not the people who are brickwalling.

I find that very hard to believe, and I doubt you have any non-anecdotal evidence of this.

[Zoltar]

Recruiting: Hardcore raiders don't like the debuff because they don't like being time limited by blizzard, NOT because the debuff exists or that there's a ton of hardcore raiders that want to raid without it for NO REWARD. Especially if it means the guild is behind the progression curve you're looking for as a hardcore raider. Honestly, if I saw a guild that was like "#1 guild that doesn't use the debuff on our server" my immediate thought would be "probably the only guild that doesn't use the debuff, who are you competing against, go away."

This makes absolutely no sense to me. If your guild disables the debuff, then how are you "time limited"? You aren't. You have all the time in the world.

The point is, as much as not using the debuff might hurt you due to people that value getting the kill and racing for progression, it could help you recruit people that would rather have the challenge of not using it.

[Lore]

I don't think disabling the debuff is ever going to be a realistic option, ESPECIALLY when it ramps up in small increments. Remember, the appeal of hardcore raiding to a hardcore player is the idea of doing everything you can to get an advantage. Hardcore players simply won't pass up an available advantage.

An important aspect of game design that lots of forum arguments (and, entirely too often, developers) like to forget is that the proof of whether a design works or not is, as they say, in the pudding. If you implement something, but nobody uses it and everyone's telling you they don't want to use it, then there is an issue in that implementation. The burden of figuring out what that issue is (be it major or minor) and resolving it falls on the developers. "The playerbase just doesn't understand" is never an appropriate answer.

[Leucifer]

I find that very hard to believe, and I doubt you have any non-anecdotal evidence of this.

I'd argue this from a different direction. Should guilds be able to kill a H-Rag type of boss? I mean, so what if they hit a wall. They're able to get the kill on normal. Why should a heroic kill be "guaranteed' for anyone? Heroic Rag, pre-nerf.... I can kind of understand some of the heartache. There's a difference between "near impossible" and "hard to kill".

What's the dividing line? 30% of all guilds able to go 6/7H? 50% of all guilds capable of going 6/7H? Many said that the content leading up to it was "trivial"... so maybe some of those guilds should never have BEEN 6/7H. Problem is.... EVERYONE thinks their guild should be able to do it. By everyone, I mean the people who regularly run heroic content. I mean, anyone who thinks the "sense of entitlement" that people think is confined to the "baddies", they frankly need to get their head checked. MANY heroic raiders (just my perception) come across with an attitude that they are entitled to something, be it special treatment or just acknowledgement. My counter to this.... "BULLSHIT!" So many of these things reek of the "Well, that's ok for them..... but not for me," type of attitude.

Anyway....
Of course, it doesn't help when Blizzard remains mum and flies by the seat of their pants. They say they have expectations, but never vocalize. But hey.... that's an easy way to make sure no one can hold you accountable. If they had any interest in doing this, they'd say....

Heroic Tier. 10/10
Bosses 1 - 3.... 70% of guilds able to clear 10/10 normal should be able to do this
Bosses 4 - 6.... 50%
Bosses 7 - 9.... 30%
Boss 10 - 10%

But no. instead you get vague and mysterious comments from Blues such as, "The numbers weren't at a point we liked yet, so we are implementing buffs/nerfs". The only reason we have any idea of where these numbers lie is because of sites like wowprogress, where we can see an estimate from data farming..... and judge that by the reaction from the devs.

This... again though, I where I think one of my more radical notions should seriously be considered. The player community needs to be more actively engaged in the difficulty and planning of content. And in a more meaningful way than the Official Forums..... which are a travesty.

My thoughts? Give some guilds a seat at the table. You want to make achievements meaningful?.... especially for heroic raiders?.....
Give those guilds that complete a H-Rag a special forum.... achievement members only. Include some meaningful benefits, such as guaranteed early beta access and raid testing. Dangle that carrot in front of them..... and gear it or tailor it towards heroic raiders, and designing the next tier of heroic raids. Limit it though so they only beta one boss (so they don't get to preview EVERYTHING).... and use the logs off that to help tailor the adjustments.
This info can also be used to scale normal raid content to ensure that it is appropriate for that crowd.

Just a thought. Maybe it's a crazy one. As much as I want to champion the "little guy", the average player..... I also don't want to see the top tier players being neglected. I honestly think that Blizzard has a GREAT RESOURCE they could tap into in order to imrpove their game design...... but are failing to see that.

[ChairmanHez]

This is a bit of a departure from the current state of the thread, but does it bother anyone else that Blizzard is using a pre-conceived raid boss success rate?

If we take them at their word that they monitor the progress of raiding guilds and base the nerfbat timing on that, then it's clear to me that they are using some model of expected progress. This potentially means that they are not taking into account changes to the raid population from tier to tier. Perhaps the percentage of "skilled" raiders attempting hard mode content is decreasing from T12 to T13. If that is happening, then naturally the overall progress of T13 raiding guilds would be behind previous tiers. Yet their models would not take this into account and would call for more nerfs early, since the expected percentage of success would not be being met. I am not necessarily saying that this is happening here, but for people that are in favor of these progressive nerfs to content (whether normal or heroic), what is a fair gauge of when to kick in the nerf?

No matter the criteria used, the concept bothers me. It's like a teacher who has a pre-conceived expectation of grade performance from his class. For example, he might say, "I expect 30% A's, 30% B's, 30% C's, and 10% D's and F's," and adjust his students grades up and down to make them fit his model.

This isn't exactly the same of course (video game vs. classroom) but the principle is the same. And it bothers me. And by the way, I served as a teaching assistant for a professor who believed in precisely that sort of grading.

[ChairmanHez]

Damnit, Leucifer. You beat me to it. lol

[hp2]

I don't think disabling the debuff is ever going to be a realistic option, ESPECIALLY when it ramps up in small increments. Remember, the appeal of hardcore raiding to a hardcore player is the idea of doing everything you can to get an advantage. Hardcore players simply won't pass up an available advantage.

It's not a realistic option when you're trying to get your first heroic Deathwing kill, I agree. Now that you have the kill under your belt, is the option back on the table? You have your title + mount + 8/8H recruitment prestige -- it's all behind you now. You've stated before, "You keep on raiding even though heroic Deathwing is dead because you enjoy raiding". You now have an actual choice -- farm loot with a 20% or greater debuff or turn the dial back to zero for a challenge. If the other people in your raid veto that idea, that just means they're in it for the loot because that's all that's left at this point.

-HP

[Leucifer]

I don't think disabling the debuff is ever going to be a realistic option, ESPECIALLY when it ramps up in small increments. Remember, the appeal of hardcore raiding to a hardcore player is the idea of doing everything you can to get an advantage. Hardcore players simply won't pass up an available advantage.

An important aspect of game design that lots of forum arguments (and, entirely too often, developers) like to forget is that the proof of whether a design works or not is, as they say, in the pudding. If you implement something, but nobody uses it and everyone's telling you they don't want to use it, then there is an issue in that implementation. The burden of figuring out what that issue is (be it major or minor) and resolving it falls on the developers. "The playerbase just doesn't understand" is never an appropriate answer.

Damn. Wish I'd seen this before I posted.

Yes Lore!!! Agree! I'd actually argue that "the playerbase just doesn't understand" is not only inappropriate.... it also shows how out of touch the devs are.
The playersbase DOES understand.... and probably better than the devs in some ways as the playerbase is in the thick of it. They are the troops on the ground.

What baffles me is that it seems like, time and again, Blizzard appears to have this weird, Bizzaro-World, selective hearing and something always gets lost in the translation. It's like this......

[Leucifer]

Damnit, Leucifer. You beat me to it. lol

I'll share credit on any ideas. I'm not fussy. So long as it actually improves things....

[Zoltar]

I'd argue this from a different direction. Should guilds be able to kill a H-Rag type of boss? I mean, so what if they hit a wall. They're able to get the kill on normal. Why should a heroic kill be "guaranteed' for anyone?

But no. instead you get vague and mysterious comments from Blues such as, "The numbers weren't at a point we liked yet, so we are implementing buffs/nerfs". The only reason we have any idea of where these numbers lie is because of sites like wowprogress, where we can see an estimate from data farming..... and judge that by the reaction from the devs.

I could be wrong, but I don't think they necessarily have targets for completion percentage. I think they monitor the rate of progression, not the progression itself. So even if the average progression was at an "acceptable" level (say 50% were 5/8 H), but the rate of new kills slowed significantly, they would keep nerfing.

[Lore]

It's not a realistic option when you're trying to get your first heroic Deathwing kill, I agree. Now that you have the kill under your belt, is the option back on the table? You have your title + mount + 8/8H recruitment prestige -- it's all behind you now. You've stated before, "You keep on raiding even though heroic Deathwing is dead because you enjoy raiding". You now have an actual choice -- farm loot with a 20% or greater debuff or turn the dial back to zero for a challenge. If the other people in your raid veto that idea, that just means they're in it for the loot because that's all that's left at this point.

-HP

Now that we've killed it, we're just farming it for the hell of it... so no, there's no real point other than bragging rights (which in and of themselves would be debatable since we're doing it with HM Deathwing gear).

It's also something of a tertiary argument since the main arguments revolve around turning off the debuff during progression.

[Lore]

Yes Lore!!! Agree! I'd actually argue that "the playerbase just doesn't understand" is not only inappropriate.... it also shows how out of touch the devs are.
The playersbase DOES understand.... and probably better than the devs in some ways as the playerbase is in the thick of it. They are the troops on the ground.

To be clear: I don't really think Blizzard is blaming the playerbase in this situation. They've pointed at the ability to turn the debuff off a few times, but it's generally been as more of a suggestion and not a "You can turn it off so it doesn't matter." A lot of forum posters are saying that, though.

[ChairmanHez]

I could be wrong, but I don't think they necessarily have targets for completion percentage. I think they monitor the rate of progression, not the progression itself. So even if the average progression was at an "acceptable" level (say 50% were 5/8 H), but the rate of new kills slowed significantly, they would keep nerfing.

This criteria sounds good at first, but I still have problems with it. What boss's progression kill rate do you use as your benchmark? No single boss is appropriate for a zone wide debuff. And I don't think a total boss kill rate is right either. I won't get deep into statistics, but you're smoothing over far too many boss-specific mechanics. For example, you may have a fight such as Heroic Spine or Heroic Gunship that is causing problems for progression. But if many more raids are succeeding at earlier fights, then the aggregate number of boss kills will be high enough to let those raiders keep "suffering" and "hitting the brick wall" which is precisely what these nerfs are supposed to alleviate.

Plus, as was pointed out in an earlier post, there are some fights that have mechanics that are not going to be made easier by the nerfs, they will still be pass/fail (or wipe/no wipe). So you will have overall diminishing returns on upping the magnitude of the debuff.

Will upping the debuff make it easier for raids to progress? Absolutely. But is there a good way to benchmark when and how much to debuff? I would argue no.

[Lrot]

I think the real question is, what do those of you who are, or aspire to be hardcore raiders want from the hardcore raiding experience?
What is the real reward one gets from hardcore raiding?

Is it personal satisfaction?
Is it bragging rights?
Is it enhanced ability to recruit for your guild?
Is it gear?
Is it simply the freedom to consider yourself "hardcore"?

It's probably a silly question to ask in a public forum, as I'm certain nobody will answer honestly, but I believe the honest answer to that question would tell quite a tale.
After all, this thread isn't specifically about difficulty nerfs, but about a perceived casulization of hardcore raiding.

[truculent]

I think the real question is, what do those of you who are, or aspire to be hardcore raiders want from the hardcore raiding experience?
What is the real reward one gets from hardcore raiding?

Is it personal satisfaction?
Is it bragging rights?
Is it enhanced ability to recruit for your guild?
Is it gear?
Is it simply the freedom to consider yourself "hardcore"?

It's probably a silly question to ask in a public forum, as I'm certain nobody will answer honestly, but I believe the honest answer to that question would tell quite a tale.

-To not be bored senseless with the content
-To raid in a setting that is specifically designed to be a challenge, not just a means to get "phat lootz" (which, is pointless unless you want to actually engage more challenging content mind you) .
-To have a competitive platform to engage said content.