+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 51

Thread: The Weekly Marmot - Deconstructing the Dragon Soul Debuff

  1. #1

    The Weekly Marmot - Deconstructing the Dragon Soul Debuff

    Follow me on Twitter | Facebook | Google+

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    11
    I def agree that putting time into a fight makes it more rewarding.

    Edit: I also feel that nerfs should come when raiders have had enough time to farm gear off their farm bosses to "gear nerf" what they're progressing on. Not just 1 week of wipes and the blizzard comes in and nerfs the boss.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1
    Lore, I'd like to know your opinion on whether a %-debuff (Like in Dragon Soul) or a %-buff (Like in Icecrown Citadel) is better. The buff has the advantage of making the player feel stronger (more damage, more health, more healing), whereas the debuff only really affects healers (less to do, yet you don't feel stronger).
    Because of this I'm inclined to believe that a %-buff is better for the -feel- of getting better (much like getting new gear, actually). But as Blizzard have stated at some point they don't like the %-buff because the player feels weak as soon as he leaves the instance.
    I'd really like to know your opinion about this.

    (P.S.: I don't really visit this forum, so I'm not likely to respond, I'm mostly here to give this input. Also; if you want to use this for PST or something like that you could reword it to "Do you prefer the %-buff from ICC or the %-debuff from DS?", which is short and straight to the point, just like you want it).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    259
    Lore:

    Why keep raiding once you're 8/8 HM? We got 8/8 and just quit raiding until MOP. Maybe some folks won't come back, but recruiting shouldn't be too hard since we finished #2 on our server and got 8/8 with the 15% nerf. Not the best, but certainly a lot better than most of the other guilds on our server.

    Imo, there's no reason to keep farming the place endlessly. Let people have a break! Breaks are good :P

    I'm fine with the nerfs, although I agree they were a bit too fast (especially considering we all knew how long it was going to take for MoP to come out). I like the idea of going for 10% nerfs, as well as achievements. It could be really simple (or perhaps hard, I don't do code) but just put some sort of tracker on everyone's HM achievement for each boss that keeps track of what % you killed the boss at. You get say, Yor'sahj's achievement and it has a little 10% in the corner. You could put a note on there about which expansion too I suppose.
    Last edited by Knighterrant81; 07-12-2012 at 07:42 PM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,602
    Issue I have with the achievement for doing it without the nerf:

    Gear. And why I don't think it would work. The Paragon's of the world that are beating it pre-nerf are people that do it with worse gear too, so getting the achievement after you're already farming from the boss for the better gear is still not as big of an accomplishment. The raid might even be doing more DPS when they kill the boss without the nerf but with better gear than they would have at 5%. Some fights you can still just out-gear.

    Maybe I'll send this to you as a PST question, but I feel like bringing back "tiered progression" needs to happen. I hate that the previous content becomes irrelevant once the next patch comes out. What I'd like to see happen is content gets a blanket nerf (or blanket nerfs) once the next tier is out, and you need to clear the current tier to do the next tier, and not even necessarily on an individual basis, but like 1 person has to have killed the last normal mode boss of the previous tier in order to unlock the new tier, I don't feel like that's entirely unreasonable, or the guild just needs to have the achievement from the last tier to do the next one, something to that extent.

    I am still just very against blanket nerfs for the following reason: blanket nerfs seem to assume a homogeneity about guilds that I don't believe exists mainly because of the time various guilds spend on a boss. Some guilds will spend 20 hours/week raiding, others will spend 6 hours/week raiding. I don't think the guilds that spend less time raiding should have content cut out from under them. That's really what it feels like. I think the guilds that feel cheated aren't the ones that spent 20 hours a week raiding and just couldn't cut it, but the ones that spent ~10 hours a week raiding and feel just short because their real lives dictate they can't raid more than that. They'd be perfectly CAPABLE of doing what Paragon does, but they can't spend the same amount of time playing WoW that paragon can.

    Now blizzard has claimed (iirc) that originally they watched progression curves and as they plateaued they put out a blanket nerf. But I call shenanigans on that as well, first because the nerfs are coming every 4 weeks, and second because I refuse to believe they everyone gets stuck on whatever boss they're on at the exact same time. I'm sure there is a specific boss that a bunch of people might get stuck on, and if you see progression for that boss plateau then you need to do a targeted nerf for that boss, but I still just do NOT agree that blanket nerfs are a good thing. Especially with 3 different levels of raid: LFR, Normal, HM. Content should be designed so that every guild can find their pace and progress at their own pace, and I still believe that lowering the gear level difference and not making the previous tier completely irrelevant will help a lot of guilds keep activity high.

    Idk, that's my 2cp.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    17
    Lore, it almost sounded like you said.....FOUR levels of Dragon Soul?

    inb4

    Raider: Blizz, can we haz more content?
    Forum Troll: You haven't completed X Raid on Heroic without the buff noob.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    169
    one thing about the achievment for no debuff is as you said the raider's want to bring their wowprogress rank up and most likely if they added achievments for no debuff bosses that would probably become the next progression path on wowprogress so you would see something like Madness (N) Madness (H) and Madness (HN) or something and could take away a lot of the feeling of yes we finally got this boss for heroic modes for some of the less progressed raid guilds.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    8
    Lore, I'm kinda agree with others. I don't fully get the argument that you can't turn off the buff when farming because it makes it harder. I thought real raiders enjoyed raiding for the sake of raiding (or is it the more casual players who enjoy raiding for the sake of raiding) ? If you guys are just trying to hurry up and get farming over with, isn't that the actual problem ? It sounds like you've turned Dragon Soul into a part time job that one is required to show up and clear, even though it sounds like a few of your guildmates have low to no interest in it anymore, Hence the mini naps.

    I do agree that the debuff comes a little too soon and should come no sooner than 3 months after the release of the RAID.

    On Achievements, I think it should be an achievement that WoWprogress.com would be able to poll and that doing it without the debuff should vault you ahead of a guild who did it with the debuff. Blizzard could make that change pretty easy and WoWprogress.com (and others) should find a way to make it work in rankings. Turning off the debuff is a valid option, Blizzard and Wowprogress should make it an attractive option for those that are worried about rankings. I'm fine with titles\mounts only being achievable with the No Debuff option
    Last edited by Mad_Murdock; 07-12-2012 at 08:12 PM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Knighterrant81 View Post
    Why keep raiding once you're 8/8 HM?
    Mounts. We're done next week.
    Follow me on Twitter | Facebook | Google+

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    259
    Maybe I'll send this to you as a PST question, but I feel like bringing back "tiered progression" needs to happen. I hate that the previous content becomes irrelevant once the next patch comes out. What I'd like to see happen is content gets a blanket nerf (or blanket nerfs) once the next tier is out, and you need to clear the current tier to do the next tier, and not even necessarily on an individual basis, but like 1 person has to have killed the last normal mode boss of the previous tier in order to unlock the new tier, I don't feel like that's entirely unreasonable, or the guild just needs to have the achievement from the last tier to do the next one, something to that extent.
    Would that really make old content relevant though? Unless your guild was completely brand new, you've probably gotten at least a normal mode clear of previous content (I'm not super dedicated and I have clears on 4 toons at least). It would only hamper the progress of completely new raiders which is probably not something we want at this point in the game.

    It was pretty depressing back in Vanilla and BC to realize that basically you were never going to see the inside of Black Temple because you weren't going to guild hop.

    Old content is still somewhat relevant - you have transmog and achievements, and you can go back and finish any HM clears you might have missed (I know that's only for the mid casuals who don't clear it all when its current) later when your gear is better. We did that for t11 at least (we never even attempted HM Rag which was the only FL HM we missed, and we are 8/8 HM DS now).

    I liked how you still saw a lot of folks running t11 content even while FL was out because that was the next step down in gear. It was the "casual" content before we got LFR. A Nef kill still meant something halfway through FL. Perhaps what could happen is to only release the LFR version of an instance after it is no longer current content (so for example the LFR of FL wouldn't be released until DS is on live servers). Of course, that won't really work for the first tier each expansion, so LFR there would have to be up to date with current content (or perhaps fall back on heroics and not have an LFR at all for the first tier - and make the heroics a little more rewarding - on par with LFR at least). Let us buy some tier with VPs again for the first tier (but not the later tiers because LFR will be there).

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,602
    You didn't have to guild hop to do BT... My guild cleared Vashj/KT within 1 month of starting 25 man raids during patch 2.3... it might have been 2.4, I don't really remember, it wasn't 3.0 though. It was post nerf, but that's my whole point, blanket nerf the previous tier when the new one is out to then give people the chance to progress if they did truly just brick wall, otherwise just do targeted boss nerfs for unreasonable bottlenecks.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    259
    You didn't have to guild hop to do BT... My guild cleared Vashj/KT within 1 month of starting 25 man raids during patch 2.3... it might have been 2.4, I don't really remember, it wasn't 3.0 though.
    Our guild....didn't. Suffice to say, my guild in BC wasn't very good :P

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1
    Just to get deeper into the "feats of strength" thing. With all the criticism on the "summer challenge" raids, would it be better to put in some achievements to do things like tier 11 heroic with "x" minimum gearscore, or summer challenge karazhan with max 4 ppl in raid and 0 max gearscore(ironman style). These things would help to keep the people bored with current content interested. I think you also recently argued (PST ep. 86 12:08) that most of the people currently playing are not into hardcore raiding. Maybe even dumbing down some of those feats of strength would keep normal players happy as well.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    63
    It speaks volumes to the character of the so called "Community" if they are going to be so prissy about when a guild completes normal and heroic modes of a dungeon.

    The top guild would have already gotten as close to a full clear as they can during beta, so they are fully versed and prepared for the raiding when MoP goes lives (just like any past expansions) The race for "World first" begins in earnest then anything after that is, on the world stage, not that important to anyone apart from the guild in question.

    If anyone tries to devalue my guild achievements because the clear/kill was done after a buff they'll just get added to what ever ignore list I can put them on, we are not raiding to suit them, we are raiding for us!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,602
    Banhammer: it's not about what the community thinks persay, or that the guild wouldn't be CAPABLE of doing it without the nerf, it's the time commitment. Some guilds can spend way more time than others, those guilds will see content sooner and they don't care about the nerf %. I, on the other hand, feel like I am an extremely capable raider and haven't come across a boss yet where I go "okay this is just crazy, I just can't do this fight." (though to be fair I never saw pre-nerf cthun).

    For me it's a matter of pride to ME I want to be able to say I killed the bosses before there was a random blanket nerf. As lore said, right now turning off the buff is a non-choice. Yes you TECHNICALLY can do it, but you're just making your life harder and you might as well do shit like not gem your gear if you're going to start voluntarily nerf your dps.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    4,033
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    I am still just very against blanket nerfs for the following reason: blanket nerfs seem to assume a homogeneity about guilds that I don't believe exists mainly because of the time various guilds spend on a boss.
    I don't disagree with regard to hard modes, but the issue with looking at it from a guild kills perspective is that it is at odds with how Blizzard has said it looks at advancement which is player kills, if players are not advancing then they nerf, it's not nerf if guilds aren't advancing. I believe Blizzard is looking at the issue of whether or not raids are puggable - can a group of 10 (or 25) players on a server get together and make good progress in a normal or heroic raid; if yes people come back for more. Blizzard isn't going to keep subscriptions worrying about how many guilds per se are progressing, they need to look at individuals. I just wonder if they adjust their figures to take into account alts i.e. one player many toons progressing of that would just be statically insignificant.

    Nerfing mob health and damage is more powerful then buffing players if you're looking at the average to below average player they want to advance through raids. Sure they could make Joe Casual 30% more powerful, but if he sucks with his rotation his damage output is still going to suck, just suck a little less, but maybe not suck less enough to kill the boss. Drop the boss health and damage, buff Joe casual with the inflated primary stats and he's taking less 30% less damage no matter what, so he can live longer and move the boss health starting point down 30% and you've improved a casual's chance for a kill.

    It's like golf, give the average player a ball that may travel 30% further and maybe he hits the green cause he got an extra 20% distance despite his crappy swing, but move the tee 30 yards closer and he's on the green.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,602
    Quote Originally Posted by Theotherone View Post
    I don't disagree with regard to hard modes, but the issue with looking at it from a guild kills perspective is that it is at odds with how Blizzard has said it looks at advancement which is player kills, if players are not advancing then they nerf, it's not nerf if guilds aren't advancing. I believe Blizzard is looking at the issue of whether or not raids are puggable - can a group of 10 (or 25) players on a server get together and make good progress in a normal or heroic raid; if yes people come back for more. Blizzard isn't going to keep subscriptions worrying about how many guilds per se are progressing, they need to look at individuals. I just wonder if they adjust their figures to take into account alts i.e. one player many toons progressing of that would just be statically insignificant.
    A few things: 1st, you assume blizzard actually does this, but I don't believe they do. The nerfs are far to consistent and systematic, I refuse to believe that people are just plateauing every 4 weeks, especially now. 2nd, I'd even be okay with it for normal modes, the problem is that blizzard has managed to try and convince people that every tier is really 2 tiers (well 3 tiers now). Once you're done with normal mode, you go to hard mode, even if you're a "normal mode" guild. They don't think they put out 8 bosses in DS, they think they put out 24. You breeze through LFR, then you do normal, they you do hardcore, and subsequently they look at progression as the same, they don't want people stalling in HMs. But... that's part of it for hardcore raiders. Hitting that hard boss fight and fighting through it. Even if you are only a guild that will get 3-4 hours of attempts in on that boss that week, so it will take you more weeks than paragon, but maybe not as much raw time.

    What they've done is taken the easy way out, just kinda gone "ehhh... that's about right, now we'll just set this to nerf itself every 4 weeks".

    Nerfing mob health and damage is more powerful then buffing players if you're looking at the average to below average player they want to advance through raids. Sure they could make Joe Casual 30% more powerful, but if he sucks with his rotation his damage output is still going to suck, just suck a little less, but maybe not suck less enough to kill the boss. Drop the boss health and damage, buff Joe casual with the inflated primary stats and he's taking less 30% less damage no matter what, so he can live longer and move the boss health starting point down 30% and you've improved a casual's chance for a kill.

    It's like golf, give the average player a ball that may travel 30% further and maybe he hits the green cause he got an extra 20% distance despite his crappy swing, but move the tee 30 yards closer and he's on the green.
    The ICC buff increased health by 30% also, not just DPS, so really they are the exact same, there's literally no difference in the buffs. The only thing you might be able to argue is that a 30% buff to players could sometimes be exponential based on class design... but that's the only thing I can imagine. They're really the exact same thing. It's just whether the "boss" feels easier or the "player" feels more powerful.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,968
    I think what he means Agg is that if a boss has 100K hp and i do 10k DPS it dies in 10 seconds if iget a 30% buff i do 13k DPS it dies in 6.79 seconds, whereas if it gets a 30% nerf it only has 70k health and therefore dies in 7 seconds. 7 is not the same as 6.79.

    I do think you're totally right about the buff being draconian, I mean as of now LFR has the same health/damage as 25 normal, and as of next rest 25 normal will have less HP/Damage than LFR. should it really be a case of that groups that can't do LFR becuase they don't have the HPS/DPS should have an easier time time in normal as long as they move right?
    Last edited by Tengenstein; 07-13-2012 at 07:49 AM.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    4,033
    I recall Blizzard has said they look at player kills when they explained the nerf to FL; I don't disbelieve them; it makes sense since I believe the goal is to make raids puggable as they age.

    I forgot about the health increase, but the increase to damage really isn't the same as lowering the boss health, unless the damage is a constant. For a good player 30% probably means 30% for a poorer player it may mean 15% because of inconsistency in rotation or poor play dpsing. Unless I'm misunderstanding how a damage buff works.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,602
    theoretically a damage buff will be 30% of whatever DPS you were doing, regardless of if you were good or bad, but I definitely see what teng means, so I guess nerfing the boss is more consistent than buffing player dps.

    Anyways, that's why blizzard says they do, but they FL nerfs were NOT a progressive nerf like DS is, and I can buy that they looked at FL and went "well... most everyone has brick walled and isn't going anywhere, time to nerf" then they way over shot the nerf. That would have been a great place to implement a 5% nerf, for example.

    What they're doing with the progressive nerf in DS is NOT what they did in FL though, they're not looking at plateaus, they're just nerfing the content 5% every 4 weeks.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

+ Reply to 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