Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsNot all fights require a hard mode
by Matthew Rossi 
May 15th 2010 at 6:00PM
Frankly, the Gunship encounter in ICC, while fun, shouldn't have a hard mode. It's not really even hard; it's just free iLevel 277 gear for turning on a toggle. I blame Trial of the Crusader -- and specifically, having an entire separate raid lockout for Trial of the Grand Crusader -- for this. I realize I may be on the losing side of this divide, but I really don't think every single fight needs a hard mode. Some fights, sure. The four wing bosses of ICC, absolutely. The Lich King? Heck, it could be argued that Arthas should have taken a page from Algalon's book and only had a hard mode, or maybe Sindragosa should have been a hard-mode-only fight instead of a wing boss, and you only get to fight her after the Lich King is dead in some sort of doomsday scenario where she's chained up by Arthas and breaks free to destroy Azeroth in case of his demise.
I mean, does heroic Marrowgar actually feel very heroic to anyone? In my opinion, the added fight mechanics make it harder, yes, but aren't particularly interesting or epic in scope. Leaving three drakes up on Sartharion actually felt ridiculously heroic at the time when it was cutting-edge content. It took a lot of coordination and solid play to do it back when the best gear you were able to get was Naxx-25 drops.
Festergut and Rotface on heroic just make the fight more annoying, and heroic Blood Queen is basically just a gear check. Strangely, although the same could be argued for heroic Saurfang, I really enjoy that fight and feel like we've executed well when it goes off. I'm certainly not arguing for the removal of heroic difficulty, but man, I'd like to see less of it per raid. Four or five heroic fights with one fight that's basically only a heroic fight, like Ulduar did with Algalon, and a return to the variable difficulty where fights could be tuned by making specific choices would work fine for my tastes. Progressing through the various Yogg difficulty levels last year kept my guild going back well into the beginning of our ICC cycle.
Basically, I think heroic modes should be challenges to overcome, not just a new cycle of farming. You run regular ICC for gear to run heroic ICC at this point, and I think that cheapens the whole thing a trifle too much. Since we'll see an end to guilds' running the same content on 10 and 25 in Cataclysm, maybe a general scaling back of hard modes is in order as well.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Raiding
Reader Comments (Page 4 of 4)
Docrev May 15th 2010 10:12PM
They changed the nomenclature in mid expansion. For Naxx and Uld, 25 man was called heroic. Uld10 and Uld25 also had hard modes, such as Firefighter. Then, ToC came out, and they changed the terms. So now you had 10, 10 heroic, 25, and 25 heroic, which is the same strategy that ICC is using.
Duckodile May 15th 2010 10:17PM
Ooh. I knew about the change in nomenclature from 10-man = normal, 25-man = heroic to 10-man normal/25-man normal 10-man heroic/25-man heroic around the time ToC came out, but I didn't put the pieces together here.
So what you're saying is that Ulduar had a 10-man and 25-man normal mode (with the latter being referred to as "heroic" at the time), and then in each you could opt to do the hard modes. For ICC it's different because "heroic" is no longer used to describe raid size. Thanks!
I guess that means then that I just agree with everyone else who said that creating them via directly influencing the boss encounters is more interesting than flipping a toggle. (And still think that the post-ToC toggled hard modes should be called heroic modes, not hard modes ;) )
slythwolf May 15th 2010 10:01PM
"Sindragosa should have been a hard-mode-only fight instead of a wing boss, and you only get to fight her after the Lich King is dead in some sort of doomsday scenario where she's chained up by Arthas and breaks free to destroy Azeroth in case of his demise."
*nerdgasm*
That would have been SO COOL.
Andenthal May 20th 2010 3:36AM
@Sumadin,
What you are describing is more of an issue with itemization, not hard modes.
You're correct in that hard modes should drop better gear than the non-heroic counterparts (trash included), but that does not mean every single item should have a heroic upgrade that's +2 of each stat better.
Thomas Prescott May 16th 2010 3:05AM
I disagree. I do agree with heroic only "optional" boss, but I don't agree with making some bosses normal only. Most of the heroic bosses in ICC just add extra stuff to look out for, or otherwise require you to play better then normal. We're currently working on Sindragosa on Heroic 25, and that is the first real challenge we've had. I'd rather not go back to the days of Naxxramas 10/25 where everything was easymode and there was no challenge. The first tier of raid content in Cataclysm will actually have a heroic mode that makes things somewhat difficult and keeps you entertained for those who can stomach such content.
Gothia May 16th 2010 3:56AM
I disagree. I think that ICC hard modes are much harder than Togc. One fact is true though is that many more guilds were able to beat Togc then were able to beat Ulduar. Let go as far as to say that is a success for Blizzard and right in line with their current game philosophy.
I see a lot of people QQing about ICC hard, but the fact is 25 man ICCH only 45 guilds world wide have beaten the game and a bit more than double that amount for 10 man ICCH. I don't see where any of you have a valid argument unless you fit into one of the above categories.
One thing I am thankful for is that "most" guilds will be able to beat the game in normal mode. I am also thankful that our hard core players have a raid that fits the bill and if you have already beaten the game you can always turn off the buff to give it that much more of a challenge. Hard mode for the most part is for Hard Core Players - sorry Rossi if there isn't enough bells and whistles for you and congrats on "your" The Light of Dawn achievement?
Valt May 16th 2010 9:28AM
I think you missed the point.
Lich king is on hes own league. I think you are forgetting that most of the guilds had already done 10/12 icc hardmodes pretty fast after normal lk kill.
Heck, I remember most top progressing guilds did 10/12 in FIRST WEEK hardmodes were possible. Putricide took another week or two and then LK took rest of the days.
25man:
Total 12/12 guilds atm: 45
Total 11/12 guilds atm: 1250
Lich king is true hardmode in ICC because it actually has different stuff(see ulduar hardmodes) and not just more damage.
I think the numbers prove that when theres true hardmode it SHOWS. It took what, month or 2 to get firefighter down? And what? yogg+0 took almost whole damn patch to get down and 1 keeper took ages too for some realms.
So what I'm saying is that when there is hardmode in ICC it shows/showed on numbers.
-Lich King? "Real hardmode" fight, blocks most guilds and it shows on the charts.
-Professor? "Real hardmode" mechanics again and it showed. He was last one to go down on non-lk bosses.
-Lady D? "Real hardmode" (some top guilds called it "muru of this expansions standards") shes 3rd less killed boss in ICC hardmode.
-Rest non-real hardmode "I do more damage with one gimmick added that doesnt even matter" fights took first week or two to get down and has been done over 3k-4k guilds as opposed to true hardmodes that have been done from 45(LK), 1k(professor) and 2k (lady D)
ICC hardmodes are not "hard" in sense like "mimiron spreads freaking fire all over the place" and most of them are not even different to normal parts apart from "more damage". Sure, more damage makes it harder than normal version but thats the point hehe? Some fights with 15% buff is like doing normal with 0% buff all over again (yawn!)
Kroof May 17th 2010 4:11PM
I agree with this completely.
I am not a fan of ToC, ICC hard modes. The majority ARE the simple, hit harder/more health fights.
Ulduar really did nail hard modes. XT and Hodir aren't the best of the bunch, but I love their style more than any other hard mode fight. XT hard mode made you be MUCH more careful about where you explode. Hodir required that your dps really did everything they could to pick up as many buffs as possible.
I love being able to pick and choose what bosses to attempt on hard mode, I love being able to flick a switch to initiate it, I love having bosses feel epic when it is hard mode.
Ozzard May 16th 2010 4:42AM
As a "casual" player, I like the current system. I stand a chance of seeing some of the end-game. If there was only one mode for some of the bosses, it would have to be tuned for the dedicated raiders (or the QQ would be unbelievable). At that point, folks like me would never see past the first boss tuned in that way.
Of course, whether or not this is a Good Thing depends on your point of view.
kidsmoke May 16th 2010 7:46AM
I couldn't agree more. More bosses should be a little more like the heroic counterparts on Reg and Heroic modes should be saved for fights where the encounter is significantly changed or challenging. Even though I am 11/12 HM I really like the Ulduar method of heroic mode and heroic loot better. The amount of work put into learning Sindra and PP really isn't worth the one i277 piece you get in return (albeit the do drop a few other nice things as well). I couldn't believe after all that time you only get one piece of heroic tier.
Spencicle May 16th 2010 8:45AM
Just to comment on the last sentence of the article (slightly off topic) but at its current incarnation the idea of the 10 and 25 on the same lockout will lead to the death of 25 mans. Not to be pessimistic, but raid leaders much prefer 10 man raids to 25 man. It is incredibly easier to organize and incredibly easier to lead. If the fights are tuned exactly the same (which is as much of an impossible task to do as balancing every class and every spec in this game), no one is going to want to 25 man where it is far easier to screw up and takes significantly longer to clear.
If the only incentive to doing one over the other is more loot, the amount that drops from 25 man will have to be over 5 times as much as 10 man for every boss. Otherwise it will be faster t gear your 10 man raid.
While I LOVE the idea of not running 10 and 25 (I'm incredibly happy with the fact that most of rogues BiS gear comes from 25 and 10 man is mostly to get a cool drake) the answer is not balance them equally and just make one drop more loot, the answer is to itemize the gear properly for their raid size and not make players have to run a few 10 man heroic bosses just to get their BiS gear.
Harrumph May 16th 2010 9:04AM
It seems as though the largest problem is blizzard's elimination of previous tiers of content. I'm surprised nobody has addressed this.
To clarify, here's how it worked:
In T7, you had 2 levels of badges, Heroism and Valor.
Heroism dropped from 5man HCs & 10m T7.
Valor dropped from the 25m T7.
In T8, you had another level of badges being introduced - Conquest.
Heroism dropped from 5man HCs and 10m T7.
Valor dropped from 25m T7 and 10m T8.
This was interesting, as the progression path became
1) Heroics + 10m T7.
2) 25m T7 + 10m T8.
3) 25m T8.
4) 25m (Hard Modes?)
Tier 9 is where things screwed up - they effectively eliminated two entire tiers from the raiding sphere - Heroism and Valor Tiers.
1) Triumph Dropped in 10m T9, 25m T9, 10m[H] T9, 25m[H] T9.
2) Conquest dropped everywhere else.
This reduced the progression path to
1) Heroics.
2) T9.
2.5) T9 HM content
The same pattern continued into T10, with gear for harder modes of T10 primarily coming from T10 itself, albeit in a lower difficulty.
So, once again, the progression path is completely screwed. (Before several people state that ICC isn't doable in 232 badge gear, I'd have to state that if ToC10 normal is doable entirely in blues, surely then ICC10 normal can be done by full 232 raiders?
http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com/2010/05/lfm-toc10-55k-gs-achie-or-no-inv.html )
1) Heroics
2) Icecrown. Lots of it.
This is strongly contrasted with what I would consider an *Ideal* progression path.
1) Heroics + 10m T7
2) 25m T7 + 10m T7H + 10m T8
3) 25m T8 + 25m T7H + 10m T8H +10m T9.
4) 25m T9 + 25m T8H + 10m T9H +10m T10
5) 25m T10 + 25m T9H + 10m T10H
6) 25m T10H
However, instead of having this huge number of instances available, and instead of allowing players to progress up the tiers, they ELIMINATE the previous tiers of content. How many guilds are "progressing" in Ulduar? How many pugs run Naxx25? Why should they?
Blizzard wants "everyone to experience a lot of the content", But a large portion of players never even see Naxxramas or Ulduar, How can this contradiction be reconciled?
Fryiuer May 16th 2010 6:52PM
I think I fall into that category Harrumph. I hit 80 on my main the week ICC came out and I was recruited by a guild focused on 10 mans a couple of weeks later. I was geared up by Glory of the Hero Heroic runs that first week, tested out in ToC once to see if I could listen to directions. Between those ICC 5mans and the fact that I like to play the AH and PVP I was in full 219 and 232 gear with Wrathful Bracers right off the bat and I was raiding ICC 10.
I still haven't done Naxx. But we go there every other week or so on Friday for the Weekly which starts our Dragon Night. Ony 10, OS Zerg, and Maly 10. On Saturday we do VOA 10 and 25 when we can and then ICC 10 with our main team (starting on Heroic Mode next week - lastnight was awesome) and then on Sunday we help gear our more casual progression guildies with ToC and Retro Raids which I love because I never got to see any of that content. In fact seeing all the content is what drives our Guild. It's not about world-firsts and setting the meters on fire. It's about seeing all there is to see and doing all there is to do. A few weeks ago we did the weekly in Uld and instead of hoping out as soon as Ignis was down to go try to get another roll at a Black Drake, we went until we wiped on Hodir. And then we got our Black Drake.
Drakes, titles, achievements, and a general sense of accomplishment are what drives us. We also love the lore and want to experience it all. With my guild and among my friends that's what it's all about. The Pic of our Rag Tag group with Kingslayer titles lined up in Dal on our Violet Proto-Drakes with the rest of our guildies kneeling down in the front row wearing nothing but their chef's hats and loremaster titles.
yns88 May 16th 2010 2:34PM
This is a terrible idea for new players and alts. Can you imagine being forced to repeatedly raid content that nobody else ever wants to see again just so that you can join in on your guild's raid?
Can you imagine how much of a pain it will be for everyone else in your guild when they have to repeatedly carry you through naxx and ulduar even though they drop absolutely nothing useful for them, just so that you can get the gear needed for TOC?
The 2-tier system is working fine, and it will continue to work fine when they implement it in Cataclysm.
Harrumph May 16th 2010 3:27PM
I don't know about you, but as a new player, I would much prefer to experience ALL of the endgame raiding - not just the current tier.
as an alt, well, I'd much rather run Naxxramas or Ulduar than venture into icecrown... again.
Regarding "dragging people through older content"
This isn't any more true than it is now, Guilds would still run the previous tier in order to gear up (How many guilds stopped TOC/TOGC farming when ICC first came out?)
In short, my point is as follows.
1) People feel the content is stale.
2) There is "useless" content sitting around that could easily not have been thrown away.
rkaliski May 16th 2010 9:36PM
Hardmode should be an extra, the dessert, the double scoup of whipped creme on your pie not the meat and potatoes of the run.
The biggest problem with the hard mode in ICC is that frankly all it accomplishes is to stroke your ego. There is no other boss that will matter after Arthas. Everyone will go back to square one with the Xpac.
Now, here is what they could have done.
After you kill Arthas and Bolivar goes to take the helm(assuming you are alliance). Sauerfang comes storming into the room with the leaders of the horde demanding the helm be destroyed. The horde chooses a champion for their side, and Bolivar and Fordring choose YOU and your group to fight for them. Win and the world is saved. Lose and the scourge will take over the world.
endymon May 16th 2010 1:52PM
I believe the reason blizzard changed the hardmodes to a toggle was to "limit" confusion over how to activate a hard mode. If they were really worried about that, they should have just put a clickable tome or something outside the bosses room, telling you what needs to be done to activate the hardmode. They could spruce it up a bit by phrasing it correctly so its not dry instructions.
Whatever the case, the hardmodes that were good in ulduar, are the ones that dramatically change the fight mechanic. And furthermore are not just pure dps races. I think you said it correctly, when a lot of the ulduar hardmodes felt like you were removing a limiter on the boss.
I think the best way to design a boss, is to design a really hard encounter with lots of abilities. Tune the hardmode. THEN after thats all done, go in, and see which abilty(s) you can easily turn off for normal mode that make the fight enormously easier. I think of it as removing the linchpin of the encounter so that when hardmode is engaged the fight is as it was intended rather than some random extra ability that doesn't really change anything.
yns88 May 16th 2010 2:42PM
I think that system is why the ICC hardmodes are so lackluster in the first place.
The hardmodes should be designed and balanced completely separately from normal modes, because they should essentially be a completely different fight with different strategy required. Simply making it "more health, more damage, and one gimmicky ability" is not very exciting for players.