Poster: Redempshun at 6/28/2006 2:53:42 PM PDT
Subject: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Has any posted a constructive non inflamatory post on this...or is it usually hijacked one way or the other..
"You have no life" "Get an epic car nub" yadda yadda.
I do believe time spent should equal rewards. If time spent equals rewards does it always have to be in large chunks at one time? That is question.
Time spent = Time spent either way.
1+1+1+1 = 4 as does 4+0.
I am just trying to open up some contructive feedback.
I for one am fine with raiding, but yet I can see it from the casual players stand point as well.
Granted I don't believe that the gear for running a 5 man instance should = the gear for running a 40 man instance.
But what if there was a five man epic style dungeon.
A fricken large epic 5 man dungeon that say maybe dropped a couple epic items at the end. The idea may not work, but I am just throwing something out.
The reason I am posting this is that there is a big block of people who feel shafted, and if a big enough block of people are complaining. It would seem to me, maybe that complaint has some validity.
As I said before I stand neutral on the issue, I work 2nd shift. Alot of my guild is on when I am playing. And what else am I really going to do at 12am (my town sucks.) so raiding it is.
URR's msg board- http://xsorbit27.com/users5/tbhurr/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8870818 |
| |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 3:18:30 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
ZOMG I love these threads! Can't get enough, mmmmmmhmhhmhmmhmmm...
Let me present you with 'Tseric's Condensed Non/Raider debate talking points'!
I am a non-raider who wants equivalent gear as raiders, but do not have the blocks of time to invest.
Are you sure you want the same as someone else or do you really just want character progression? The easiest way to provide character progression is through content, which can take some time. The turning point of this aspect of the debate is the fact that many non-raiders are not casual and have reached the end of solo content earlier than we would have liked them to. This issue can only be resolved by providing more advancement and content. This is something we are aiming for in development.
I am a non-raider who PvPs a lot and want equivalent gear to have a sense of fairness in Battlegrounds. I hate getting rolled by epic guild groups.
This can become a non-issue by a match-making system that takes into account more than just level brackets. Things like, number of wins, consecutive wins, gear values, honor ranking or any other host of variables. Matching with similarly geared players reduces the impact of a gear disparity. Again, this is something we are aiming for in development.
NOTE: If you are concerned about gear disparity in a world PvP setting, you better not have ever even thought about ganking a lowbie in your life and you certainly should consider whether PvP was the right choice for you.
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871197 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 3:48:47 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Q u o t e:
......A lowbie can level up. They can overcome the disparity through normal play. Heck they can even do it solo. That's way different from being rolled by a raider and having absoultely no chance at having the same level of gear unless I get 39 other people to help me.
I chose to play on a PvP server for fun and for a challenge. When you let newbs outgear people and then don't give your average player a chance to compete just because they can't or won't raid, then it's unfair.
It's kinda sad that a CM actually gave us a "QQ pvp server" response on this topic.
/sigh
I say this because I look at it from a perspective that realizes everything is not going to be exactly balanced through game design to everyone's exact specifications. The only way to eliminate gear disparity in world PvP is if everyone has the exact same gear, which is never going to happen. If an alliance city gets seiged by epic'd out horde and the alliance can not respond to it, that is more than just 'I don't want to raid' on the part of the alliance.
If you find yourself being outgeared by a player, get friends to help the fight. Group PvP tactics can easily supercede gear disparity in that case.
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871623 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 3:54:59 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Q u o t e:
This is the most incorrect thing I have EVER read. *in shock*
It's so incorrect and obviously so that you can't provide a decent rebuttal? Or are you still in shock? Is that what prevents a meaningful response?
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871726 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:09:16 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Q u o t e:
I understand what you're getting at, but yesterday I came to help a friend who was getting camped. I see that he (60 druid) is dead, and that he had a friend (60 hunter) with him (also dead). I see the camper, a 60 Warrior and he's at 30% health, so I run up, thinking "easy kill."
He dropped me like I wasn't even wearing armor. Now I suck at PvP, and part of why I died so fast was that I didn't expect him to hit that hard, but a monkey should be able to beat someone at 30% health.
Once we all rezzed, we were able to take him down, but I was the only one that survived.
Now if you're saying that gear disparity is meant to handle up to 3 on 1, that's fine, but please let us know that is the case now so I can decide if it's worth enduring.
Look, what I'm getting at is that even if everyone was geared the same, you are still going to run into situations where you have 3 groupmates and the opposing team has 5. That's a clear imbalance and it is that imbalance that has more impact on world PvP than gear disparity does.
World PvP really isn't about a 'fair fight'. Some people play dirty or use various unexpected elements to their advantage. I simply think that gear disparity, as an issue, has it's place in a certain context. When imbalance or advantage can change with more factors in world PvP, saying it is the defining imbalance is looking at it from a single players perspective, not the groups.
It's the difference between asking "Am I going to win this fight?" as opposed to "Is my group going to win this fight?"
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871937 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:09:16 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
I understand what you're getting at, but yesterday I came to help a friend who was getting camped. I see that he (60 druid) is dead, and that he had a friend (60 hunter) with him (also dead). I see the camper, a 60 Warrior and he's at 30% health, so I run up, thinking "easy kill."
He dropped me like I wasn't even wearing armor. Now I suck at PvP, and part of why I died so fast was that I didn't expect him to hit that hard, but a monkey should be able to beat someone at 30% health.
Once we all rezzed, we were able to take him down, but I was the only one that survived.
Now if you're saying that gear disparity is meant to handle up to 3 on 1, that's fine, but please let us know that is the case now so I can decide if it's worth enduring.
Look, what I'm getting at is that even if everyone was geared the same, you are still going to run into situations where you have 3 groupmates and the opposing team has 5. That's a clear imbalance and it is that imbalance that has more impact on world PvP than gear disparity does.
World PvP really isn't about a 'fair fight'. Some people play dirty or use various unexpected elements to their advantage. I simply think that gear disparity, as an issue, has it's place in a certain context. When imbalance or advantage can change with more factors in world PvP, saying it is the defining imbalance is looking at it from a single player's perspective, not the groups.
It's the difference between asking "Am I going to win this fight?" as opposed to "Is my group going to win this fight?"[ post edited by Tseric ]
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871937 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:24:49 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Q u o t e:
And this is why we don't do threads like this, mmmk?
but...but...I LOVE TO ARGUE!
a fiendish urge it is.
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8872148 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:09:16 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
I understand what you're getting at, but yesterday I came to help a friend who was getting camped. I see that he (60 druid) is dead, and that he had a friend (60 hunter) with him (also dead). I see the camper, a 60 Warrior and he's at 30% health, so I run up, thinking "easy kill."
He dropped me like I wasn't even wearing armor. Now I suck at PvP, and part of why I died so fast was that I didn't expect him to hit that hard, but a monkey should be able to beat someone at 30% health.
Once we all rezzed, we were able to take him down, but I was the only one that survived.
Now if you're saying that gear disparity is meant to handle up to 3 on 1, that's fine, but please let us know that is the case now so I can decide if it's worth enduring.
Look, what I'm getting at is that even if everyone was geared the same, you are still going to run into situations where you have 3 groupmates and the opposing team has 5. That's a clear imbalance and it is that imbalance that has more impact on world PvP than gear disparity does.
World PvP really isn't about a 'fair fight'. Some people play dirty or use various unexpected elements to their advantage. I simply think that gear disparity, as an issue, has it's place in a certain context. When imbalance or advantage can change with more factors in world PvP, saying it is the defining imbalance is looking at it from a single player's perspective, not the groups.
It's the difference between asking "Am I going to win this fight?" as opposed to "Is my group going to win this fight?"[ post edited by Tseric ]
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871937 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:24:49 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
And this is why we don't do threads like this, mmmk?
but...but...I LOVE TO ARGUE!
a fiendish urge it is.
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8872148 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:09:16 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
I understand what you're getting at, but yesterday I came to help a friend who was getting camped. I see that he (60 druid) is dead, and that he had a friend (60 hunter) with him (also dead). I see the camper, a 60 Warrior and he's at 30% health, so I run up, thinking "easy kill."
He dropped me like I wasn't even wearing armor. Now I suck at PvP, and part of why I died so fast was that I didn't expect him to hit that hard, but a monkey should be able to beat someone at 30% health.
Once we all rezzed, we were able to take him down, but I was the only one that survived.
Now if you're saying that gear disparity is meant to handle up to 3 on 1, that's fine, but please let us know that is the case now so I can decide if it's worth enduring.
Look, what I'm getting at is that even if everyone was geared the same, you are still going to run into situations where you have 3 groupmates and the opposing team has 5. That's a clear imbalance and it is that imbalance that has more impact on world PvP than gear disparity does.
World PvP really isn't about a 'fair fight'. Some people play dirty or use various unexpected elements to their advantage. I simply think that gear disparity, as an issue, has it's place in a certain context. When imbalance or advantage can change with more factors in world PvP, saying it is the defining imbalance is looking at it from a single player's perspective, not the groups.
It's the difference between asking "Am I going to win this fight?" as opposed to "Is my group going to win this fight?"[ post edited by Tseric ]
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8871937 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 4:24:49 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding *edited post* |
| |
Q u o t e:
And this is why we don't do threads like this, mmmk?
but...but...I LOVE TO ARGUE!
a fiendish urge it is.
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8872148 |
Poster: Tseric at 6/28/2006 5:46:04 PM PDT
Subject: Re: Raiding vs. Non raiding |
| |
Q u o t e:
1) When you say "reached the end of solo content earlier than we would have liked them to", what do you mean? Blizzard's adding of new solo content has fallen off dramatically in the last year plus. So, you think doing the solo content in a year or so is "fast"?
2) There's been an effective "blackout" for new 5-man instances for 15+ months now. From what you said, this blackout will continue until the Expansion. You've also said this was caused in part because you were working on projects like Naxx... so my quesiton is: "Will there ever be a 12-18 month new Raid-instance Blackout?" I'm serious.
Important questions that have related answers.
When we initially released the game, there was a development plan. After release much of the parts of the plan were delayed, rescheduled or otherwise bumped around to accomodate development time that had to go into stabilizing the game for so many players. Basically, we were a tad overwhelmed by the popularity of the game and that caused an interruption in the development cycle.
Had things gone exactly as we had planned, in a perfect world, we would be a lot closer to the expansion. Heck, we might have even been playing it live at this point. However, with the delays that did occur, it drew out the release of sucsessive patches and content, which is why players see Nax coming out now, as opposed to previous months. The intention and groundwork for much of the current content has been 'in vitro', so to speak, but we didn't have the schedule to get it into game. This was one of the roots of the 'blackout' you mention.
We don't want to have a 'blackout' of any kind in the future. Nor are we looking at it as a non/raid issue, where one 'player-type' gets one thing one patch and another gets a different thing in another patch. We would prefer to have patches that everyone is getting something from, if not the whole thing.[ post edited by Tseric ]
http://weallneedtherapy.ytmnd.com/
|
| | http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=8870818&p=#post8873691 |
