Regional FlagMake LFR and Normal/Heroic Share same lockout (Show MVP Posts)Source
Target Source
#1 - 2012/11/01 04:54:00 PM
Please LFR is the worst thing ever and I'm sick of feeling that I have to run it to get a gear edge for normal raiding.

Please make it share a lockout so raiders are not forced into the monstrosity that you have created.

Community Manager
Target Source
#26 - 2012/11/01 06:06:00 PM
11/01/2012 10:06 AMPosted by Buttercookie
you don't have to do LFR so don't!

You are gimping your raid group by not running it. I'm sick of feeling that I have to suffer through the mess that is LFR each and every week.

Blizzard made 10 and 25s share a lockout because 25 man guilds were "forced" into running the lower skilled 10s for extra gear each week. This new system is no different but 100x worse due to the nature of LFR.

Actually, the new system is quite a bit different than the 10- and 25-player lockout situation. A much greater percentage of the population will experience each new raid using Raid Finder, compared to normal and (especially) Heroic difficulties. The loot system is vastly different in Raid Finder to account for matchmade players, the dungeons are often split up differently for LFR (i.e. Dragon Soul in two parts), and the quality of loot that drops is lower. Given all of this, the cons largely outweigh the pros in your suggestion to make all difficulties of a raid dungeon share lockouts.

But let's discuss the issue you raise: "I run raid content in an organized group. I don't want to do LFR on top of my normal raiding, but I feel like I have to if I want to gear up as fast as possible."

The statement might be true for some, but I have a lot of follow-ups.

    - Are you in a guild that has success with Heroic raid progression? This one's pretty important, as any guild that's good enough to be farming, or at least killing several bosses in, Heroic Mogu'shan Vaults and Heart of Fear by the time Terrace of Endless Spring opens via LFR, will not likely need a single piece of gear from LFR. Terrace of Endless Spring LFR items won't be as good as your Heroic raid gear.

    - Is your guild demanding that you run LFR every week for the chance at some upgrades you haven't made via normal difficulty yet? In your post you say we're forcing you into LFR, but that's not true. I won't argue semantics, but if you're min/maxing your character for every competitive edge possible, that's a playstyle choice.

    - How badly are you really hurting your raid by not running LFR? Is your progression in normal difficulty such that upgrading from a piece of ilvl 463 gear to 476 gear is "make or break" for the entire raid? With stat inflation, the difference between these item levels is almost negligible, unless you're comparing full sets. But in the amount of time it might take you to get several upgrades via LFR, you should be getting several upgrades via normal difficulty -- and you get a head start on normal difficulty with Raid Finder always releasing at least a week later.

Certainly there's a psychology to hunting down every advantage you can, and the endgame is largely about that. But there are a lot of nuances in the raid progression system to ensure that:

    A) Raid Finder has a healthy pool of players from which to choose
    B) Organized raiders who regularly tackle Heroic difficulty will have virtually no need to run Raid Finder much at all this expansion (since a new tier's LFR ilvl won't outdo the previous tier's Heroic ilvl)
    C) Organized raiders who make progress each week on normal difficulty shouldn't hit any pass/fail gear checks and lose because they're not running LFR every week.
    D) You're not forced by the game (AT ALL) to keep running LFR each week for gear if you want to be successful in the higher difficulties.

I asked a lot of questions because you're demanding a very dramatic change to the game, but you've shared almost no details regarding why this change is completely necessary for everyone, and you're posting on an account that gives me absolutely no insight into your level-90 progression.

Community Manager
Target Source
#28 - 2012/11/01 06:11:00 PM
11/01/2012 10:16 AMPosted by Buttercookie
Don't ruin it for others by placing restrictions on something that is supposed to be accessible to all.

LFR is accessible to everyone. That is the point of it, for those that can't raid.

As everyone has pointed out in just about every post in this thread there is no need to run LFR if you're doing normal modes so all you normal mode raiders should not care, right?

I'm especially unsure what point you're trying to make here, as it seems like you're invalidating your own argument.

Community Manager
Target Source
#60 - 2012/11/01 06:43:00 PM
11/01/2012 11:21 AMPosted by Cutaia
OP is right, and doesn't take things far enough. If I don't do dailies for elder charms, get rep and valor points, finish all the questlines, or run random scenarios until I get the best iLevel 463 pieces, I'm gimping my raid. They need to stop making all this content so mandatory by attaching gear to it all. Really, it also sucks that if I don't raid every week, I end up falling behind and gimping my raid. They should just remove all this gear as drops and purchases and just give everyone a flat overall iLevel that increases each week all by itself. That way I can just do the stuff I like and not worry about doing anything else that I perceive as being beneficial to my gearset, just because I happen to want the best gear I can get.

A modest proposal. :)

Community Manager
Target Source
#74 - 2012/11/01 07:00:00 PM
11/01/2012 11:25 AMPosted by Buttercookie
I'm especially unsure what point you're trying to make here, as it seems like you're invalidating your own argument.

My point is that everyone including you has now said there is no need to run LFR and Normal each week, so why would any normal mode raider care that they could only do normal modes over LFR difficulties each week?

Mmm.. That's not quite what people are arguing -- at least that's not what I'm arguing.

Yes, I'm saying the game isn't set up so that you'll fail in normal/Heroic raids, if you're not running LFR every lockout as well. But now it sounds like your argument is: "If LFR isn't required for normal progression, no one should care if they share lockouts."

That's very flawed.

You first said we're literally forcing you to do LFR to progress. I pointed out that you're not actually forced to do it, in that you shouldn't hit a brick wall in progression because you didn't collect enough LFR gear. Now you're saying you want us to force everyone to choose between LFR and normal difficulty each week, just because it's not mandatory to run both.

I don't understand the value in asserting that we're forcing you, by design, to make certain raid progression choices -- when we're actually not -- and then arguing we should more directly force everyone to make certain raid progression choices.

Community Manager
Target Source
#79 - 2012/11/01 07:07:00 PM
11/01/2012 11:29 AMPosted by Buttercookie
To answer your questions in your first post Z since you like to derail and troll and get paid to do it to your paying customers.


I'll leave it here, then, since I've derailed your simple demand thread by... talking to you logically about it. (?)

11/01/2012 11:29 AMPosted by Buttercookie
Are you in a guild that has success with Heroic raid progression?

In the past yes, we will be starting heroic progression mixed in with HOF this week.

Is your guild demanding that you run LFR every week for the chance at some upgrades you haven't made via normal difficulty yet?

It's not demanded. But as I already said and as you know for some of us its about being in the best possible set up you can achieve on your character. Maybe those slight numbers between 463 and 476 aren't much but added up over multiple slots it adds up a lot.

How badly are you really hurting your raid by not running LFR?

That's subjective as there is no true way to find out. Let's just assume a raid group of ten people each person has two pieces of LFR gear, that's a lot of extra stats across the raid and def helps against something like a elegon fight with tight enrages.

Right. So it's a choice you're making for every advantage in the game. Do you want every advantage possible in the game? 'Cause you have to put in extra effort for that.

Community Manager
Target Source
#92 - 2012/11/01 07:32:00 PM
11/01/2012 12:15 PMPosted by Buttercookie
That was in response to your second post in the thread Z, and ya buddy you knew what you were doing with it and got the responses you wanted of the 11/10 and lolol Zarhym owned that guy blah blah blah. It was rude and not an open dialogue.

You're making big assertions and suggesting (to put it mildly) that we change the lockout system for everyone. If you're serious about this change at all -- and not just trolling -- I reserve the right to review your reasoning in context in order to formulate an answer to your suggestion. In other words, regardless of what you think my job entails, I'd certainly be of less use if I can't even point out logical fallacies in design suggestions, for fear that that'd be rude.

If you'd rather me placate you and say "thanks for the suggestion," sorry. This is a discussion forum. The dialog goes both ways.

While I don't agree with him, his point was pretty obvious.

His point was that there's no harm in making them share a lockout. LFR was created to allow non raiders to see end game content. If you're not raiding normal and heroic raids, it won't affect you, as you'll still be doing LFR just the same. If you are raiding normal and heroic raids, you're not one of the players who LFR was aimed at and shouldn't care about "missing out" on it as long as other raiders are as well.

The biggest flaw with this plan, of course, is that for decent guilds that aren't hardcore about progression, you'll run LFR for a while before even attempting normals, as 6 chances at 476 loot is going to help you clear content better than 1 chance at 489 loot (particulary the weapons). It also kills pugs, as people aren't going to forego LFR for a week just to maybe kill one boss and then have the raid fall apart, at least not until they're mostly geared out in LFR gear.

Seems non "professional forum posters" understood my point just fine.

Yes, many of us understood your point just fine, including the poster you quoted here. And like this poster, many of us saw the flaws in it.

Community Manager
Target Source
#221 - 2012/11/02 01:35:00 AM
1) LFR will remain relevant through this particular tier because it is the first one.
LFR is relevant right now. For sure. My guild for an example is 3/6 H, and 25 man (so we get bonus loots), and at least a third of my raid could still use an upgrade from LFR just due to RNG. We're still going in there! And, when you release HOF and Terrace LFR, I will certainly be in there tons to grab my tier. I have to plan all these LFRs into my week. I know this is a unique situation right now because it is the very beginning of the expansion. I am hoping that you guys' plans to devalue LFR for raiders kick in in a couple tiers with the ilvl changes; however, at this very moment, you should really believe that raiders of ALL flavors are running it.

You're correct. That's why I said in my original post that I didn't want to argue semantics over, "Blizzard is forcing me to do this." Raid Finder absolutely provides a strategic advantage for progression raiders looking to increase their character power as quickly as possible, fill out set bonuses, etc. But yes, over the course of this expansion's lifecycle that should be diminished, particularly for Heroic raiders. The need to regularly run (meaning over the course of several weeks) the Raid Finder versions of upcoming Mists of Pandaria raids should feel far less crucial, if not nonexistent, for dedicated raid guilds.

2) Valor Points.
LFR represents a larger quantity of VP than even raiding. VP is important now for gear, and will be important in the future for our upgrade paths; the cap is pretty far away by design. As long as that holds true, and as long as LFR rewards so much VP, we'll all be running LFR.

Assuming we're talking about an above-average, organized guild, Challenge dungeons are mathematically the fastest path to the VP cap. Of course the difficulty isn't comparable between LFR and Challenge Modes, but a serious raiding guild can go into an organized five-player setting and get to the VP cap faster, as opposed to gambling with a random LFR queue or facerolling LFR with a full guild clear.

You don't even have to be anywhere near a record-breaking time to be getting more VP/minute than in LFR.

3) Not every HM raider hits a new tier in Best in Slot.
You guys are opening instances very quickly. I appreciate that we are being provided with lots of raids, but you must understand that there are tons of times when LFR - at that single moment in time - represents an upgrade path for a given raider even if they are clearing a lot of heroic mode bosses.

Absolutely, and that's okay sometimes. In my first post I said that one of our goals is to ensure that Raid Finder has a healthy pool of players from which to choose. Our goal isn't to make sure progression raiders never want or need to run LFR. Having experienced raiders queuing up is usually going to be a net gain for everyone (in terms of wait times, success rates, etc.). There is usually some benefit to most level-90 players running Raid Finder, but that's obviously very different from "forced content."

It kind of depends on your goals, your guild's goals, and what you want to get out of the game. I'll still assert that Raid Finder isn't a progression roadblock for those who prefer to stick with normal/Heroic raiding.

4) Procs and tier bonuses will be devalued, but once in a while there might come one that's OP.
You also assume that the ilvl change will completely devalue LFR gear. I hope this will be true, but I suspect the devs - who try as hard as they can - will still occasionally throw in a very op set bonus or trinket proc. These things just happen.

I definitely see your point, and even I've been involved in several discussions with the developers about this concept, so I know they discuss the itemization/progression model quite a bit in their daily lives. ;)

Of note, we recently spoke about the Sigils for the legendary gem. Even in that case, they're watching closely and expect the LFR runs simply for more shots at the Sigils will tail off.

Thanks for taking the time to lay out your points clearly and constructively, Anafielle!

11/01/2012 01:38 PMPosted by Buttercookie
Zar said he wanted a discussion, yet seems to ignore the sensible well articulated points in favor of making fun of the OP.

Blues do this a lot. It's an easy way for them to deflect negative discussions and lets all their fanboys come out and derail the threads for them.

It is a little frustrating that I pay for the game and other blizzard games then get bad mouthed by their employees on a gaming board.

If I went to a store that I frequented and was insulted by the equivalent of a salesman, there would be much different repercussions.

Butter, you've accused me of trolling and bad-mouthing you, and derailing your thread.

In reality, I used your post as a catalyst to bring more attention to the very discussion I assumed you wanted to have with the community about endgame progression, and how different types of content you might not enjoy can feel mandatory if you want to build the most ideal character possible. It's a great design philosophy discussion worth having. By posting here, however, I had to address the points of your original post, in which case I disagreed with the validity of your proposed solution.

My primary point was simply that we've taken a great deal of care in crafting some pretty complex endgame progression systems, that allow for a larger degree of flexibility on the part of the player than at any point in the past for World of Warcraft. And, while your concern over the feeling of obligation to run LFR is valid, and shared by others, the change you were seeking would do more harm than good.

As far as you feeling as though I've insulted you, the very best I can say in response is that we just don't agree on the definitions of a lot of words or phrases, like "being forced," "troll," "insulting," "bad mouthing," "derailing threads," etc. As I said before, this is a discussion forum. Being critical of a person's ideas or arguments isn't the same as insulting him or her. I've kept every post honest and constructive. Frankly, I'd rather you respond in kind by refuting (or acknowledging!) my points, instead of acting victimized by my savage, filthy word spew. :p