Recent Accomplishment Thread

[Kaylia]

Given the situation, I think it's a fair compromise between 10m and 25, but legendary shouldnt be a guild effort imo. It should be an individual money sink (or time sink) that everyone can do at the same time. Nothing piss me off more in mmo than focusing the guild (linkshell) effort on a single person for a long time.

[Meresgi]

Given the situation, I think it's a fair compromise between 10m and 25, but legendary shouldnt be a guild effort imo. It should be an individual money sink (or time sink) that everyone can do at the same time. Nothing piss me off more in mmo than focusing the guild (linkshell) effort on a single person for a long time.

Especially when that person 2-3months later decides they want to play a different class or leave the game. Akin to old MC where guilds used to gear up their warrior tanks in anything they wanted, and then have the warrior bail on them while working on Rag.

[aurik]

So pug firelands on a GDKP and auction the fragments?
This is a social problem that's not exclusive to WoW.

[Katlan]

Id just assume that 10 man stuff will drop the normal one shard.. and 25 man stuff will drop the 2 shards.

[Kaylia]

So pug firelands on a GDKP and auction the fragments?
This is a social problem that's not exclusive to WoW.

This is a social problem that can be avoided with different design. Allowing more than one person to works in parallel on the same weapon would solve the issue

[aurik]

You can have more than one person work on it in parallel. Just split the fragments among everyone upgrading.

[Kaylia]

And take 7.5 months to complete all 3 legendary? That's just stupid, especially since a new tier will be out by then and will probably be better.

[aurik]

Well then complain because it takes too long to upgrade, (which it may be), not because upgrading is limited to one person at a time (which it isn't).

[Kaylia]

Well then complain because it takes too long to upgrade, (which it may be), not because upgrading is limited to one person at a time (which it isn't).

Are you even reading my post?

Why are you against the idea that everyone who complete the encounter get the shards (or quest item)? Your guild could start, one, two or 5 legendary, everyone would get it after 2-3 months, around the same time.

Time isn't even the issue, I'm simply against the idea of focusing on a single character at any time.

[Tajin]

that doesnt sound very legendary, in that case just delete legendaries from the game.

[Falaras]

Well, sorta. You still have the same number of average man-bosskills per legendary. Just that in 25 man, 25 people are working towards 1 weapon. In 10 man, only 10 are working towards that same weapon, so naturally it will take 10 people longer to do the same amount of "work".

I don't see why we have to think of it in terms of people in the guild. 25 and 10 should have the same acquisition rate, no one would stop doing 25 man guild runs to do 10 man guild runs for faster legendaries. On an individual scale you are still doing the same work in 25s and 10s, so why punish the 10 man player for it? The way you raid should be your choice, it should be as balanced as possible to promote raiding either way, this is far from balance.

[Kaylia]

that doesnt sound very legendary, in that case just delete legendaries from the game.

The quest should already filter out most baddies.

And if you're crying about the uniqueness of legendary and lore...then lol...Everybody and their mother were sporting shadowmourne by the end of wrath.

I don't see why we have to think of it in terms of people in the guild. 25 and 10 should have the same acquisition rate, no one would stop doing 25 man guild runs to do 10 man guild runs for faster legendaries. On an individual scale you are still doing the same work in 25s and 10s, so why punish the 10 man player for it? The way you raid should be your choice, it should be as balanced as possible to promote raiding either way, this is far from balance.

No one is punished. In a 25guild, you might have 6-7 people interested by the weapon, in a 10man guild, it will be 2 or 3. If you're the first in line, you will get it faster, for assuming a random distribution, the mean value is the same, and the worst case scenario is the same.

[Meresgi]

that doesnt sound very legendary, in that case just delete legendaries from the game.

This legendary will probably be replaced with w/e instance comes out after Firelands

And I gotta agree that yeah you should be able to have multiple people working on a Legendary at a time in the guild. Just make it require a lot of personal commitment to start off, sort of like all the saronite you needed for shadowmourne.

Or we could go back to the old system where they are just drops off the last bosses, which was kinda meh.

I mean you can still make them rare by requiring something like the quests for shadowmourne or the forging with 1 keeper for Yogg etc etc, you don't have to make the whole grinding shards a bitch.

[Correction]

The TBC Legendary system was a complete failure and should not be reinstated. The problem with Shadowmourne was the short window of time most wielders had to enjoy it. Legendaries should all copy the Val'anyr model = xx shards = legendary, and have at least two tiers of raiding progression to enjoy the fruits of your labor. At least with Vanilla legendaries people got to enjoy them all the way to level 70 raids.

[aurik]

I don't see why we have to think of it in terms of people in the guild. 25 and 10 should have the same acquisition rate, no one would stop doing 25 man guild runs to do 10 man guild runs for faster legendaries. On an individual scale you are still doing the same work in 25s and 10s, so why punish the 10 man player for it? The way you raid should be your choice, it should be as balanced as possible to promote raiding either way, this is far from balance.

They aren't punishing 10 man people for it. Takes the exact same amount of man-bosskills to get the same weapon. Neither 10s or 25s are punished.

[aurik]

Are you even reading my post?

I understand what you are saying, but you are not understanding what I am saying.

You can work on multiple weapons simultaneously, if you choose. Or, you can pool your efforts with your guild and work on completing one, then another, then another.
The problem then isn't that you can't work on multiple weapons (because you can) or that you have to invest all your effort in one person (because you don't). The problem is that solely by your own effort it takes too long to acquire the weapon.

And I think that's ok design. Not every item is made to be had by everyone.

[Kaylia]

I understand what you are saying, but you are not understanding what I am saying.

You can work on multiple weapons simultaneously, if you choose. Or, you can pool your efforts with your guild and work on completing one, then another, then another.
The problem then isn't that you can't work on multiple weapons (because you can) or that you have to invest all your effort in one person (because you don't). The problem is that solely by your own effort it takes too long to acquire the weapon.

And I think that's ok design. Not every item is made to be had by everyone.

If you can work on multiple weapons, but get punished considerably for doing so, I wouldn't say Blizzard let you works on multiple weapon... I'm not even sure why you're trying to argue that finishing 3 relic over 7.5 months is an option here. Not only is it an uneficient way to gears your group, it's also stupid to take so long when the content will be outgeared by then.

[aurik]

You don't get punished for working on multiple weapons. Over the long term you complete the exact same number of weapons over a given timeframe. No punishment.

[Kaylia]

You don't get punished for working on multiple weapons. Over the long term you complete the exact same number of weapons over a given timeframe. No punishment.

Are you retarded?

Name me a SINGLE advantage of doing it like this. I gave you two reasons against it.


[edit]
Yes, it's the same when you look at the number of weapon acquired after 7.5months, but it's not the same after 2.5months and 5months. The worth of your weapon isnt the same after 7.5months than it is after 2.5m...etc. If you decide to take nothing into account, than yeah, it's the "same"....but it's not.

[Norellicus]

Kaylia, perhaps try to summarize your point concisely? I'm still not sure what you're arguing about myself, so maybe that would help. Nothing aurik has said is functionally incorrect, so where is the hangup?