Tell that to the 30% of guilds in Classic TBC that couldnt finish SSC and TK.
They had to gut the raids with a midway patch in classic so guilds could finally get their kills.
1 Like
Player choice matters in a MMORPG like WoW.
I am inclined to agree.
Their one way or the highway attitude with retail is toxic which is why people are gravitating towards classic game play.
1 Like
LFR allowed ppl to see & experience the main mechanics of each raid in real-time, which helped reduce wipe fests in Normal & Heroic raids. We get to know what to expect & where to move. Simply adding another tier of dungeons, “Celestials” may help gear, but won’t help experience. It continues a cycle of “Guild Elitism”, as guilds already place requirements, demands, & conditions on raiders that benefit the GM & Officers. Further, as EVERY guild requires the use of Discord for raids it becomes Prohibitive. When the XPac originally dropped the communication app was Ventrilo, a simple, small file that didn’t take up space & create lag. Discord is a Massive file that not only takes up space but creates terrible lag when running if your PC is more than 2 yrs old. I don’t know about the rest of you, but I certainly can’t afford to drop $2k on a New gaming PC every 2 yrs. just to be able play WoW, or any other game for that matter. It appears that the majority of current players were eagerly looking forward to LFR in DS & upcoming MoP, but it appears that these Devs want to alienate the majority. It’s just a shame.
5 Likes
“Q: Who is Raid Finder for?
A: Raid Finder is primarily intended for players who don’t already raid consistently. These are players who may not have had the opportunity to take part in raid content due to scheduling conflicts, playtime constraints, limited access to other raid-capable players, or a lack of experience with higher-end content. These players may want to experience World of Warcraft’s raid content and storyline without being able to commit to the additional time investment of a raiding guild. The Raid Finder is also a great way to quickly and easily gear up alternate characters without having to worry about raid lockouts.”
— Blizzard Raid Finder FAQ, November 30, 2011
Blizzard are claiming the original targetted audience does not exist in this version of wow. At least, not in enough numbers for them to be considered in future plans.
#ImproveDontRemove
1 Like
If they make it OCE only, that’d be neat 
Flex is tuned for 10 to 25 players not tuned to 10 players. But realistically it’s not supposed to be tuned super hard by design, just moderately harder than LFR as in you can’t completely ignore everything but not so much you should ever be running into real issues.
And the fact that you can have a roster of more than 10 players without having to bench people is a huge benefit for being able to field at least 10 players since.
The lockouts in retail actually make a ton of sense as is right now. LFR for super easy queue content, normal and heroic as flex with boss loot locks and mythic as fixed size with a real raid lockout. None sharing a lockout. There’s tons of options for pretty much everyone.
Not sure if your point was simply to confirm what I said because nothing you’ve said goes against what I said.
1 Like
I explained how it helps with roster issues, when carrying enough people that you can afford to have a few absences without missing a raid isn’t a problem it’s absolutely easier to maintain a roster.
And you didn’t read my post because I already made the point.
1 Like
But you didn’t seem to understand that flex makes having more than 10 people on your roster a lot more palatable.
There’s no need to deal with the drama of benching people and guilds can pretty much be in constant recruitment mode.
Not sure how this part is not acknowledging that.
My point was that if you can’t make a 10m then you can’t make a flex, flex doesn’t solve roster issues if you can’t get 10 people.
If we’re talking about benching then generally we’re talking about good guilds which will do heroic and the last difficulty shouldn’t be flex as the tuning is a pretty important of its design and that flex mess that up. You shouldn’t feel like you need more or less players depending of prog and this happened a couple time already historically with some guilds I was in to kill the last boss of heroic (on retail when heroic become flex) and it feels horrible to be benched because tuning makes it easier.
1 Like
It solves the roster issue because guilds don’t have to target specifically 10 man raids. Which makes a lot of recruiting and raid management issues easier.
Being able to have more than 10 people makes it so you’re less likely to have an issue not being able to field at least 10 people because you can have enough where some absences don’t mean canceled raid.
It solves some issues to cause more. If a certain bosses is easier with 19 people but only can get 12 then you might want to fill or maybe you just can’t do that boss that week. Which is why flex in many ways is only good in content where difficulty doesn’t matter as much. Flexible raid size for content that is tuned to be more competitive simply doesn’t work.
But still like I’ve repeated flex doesn’t solve your issue if you can’t get 10m first.
1 Like
Flex isn’t tuned tight enough that that is a concern, the biggest issue with flex was just how many pieces of loot drop per raider since that had hard break points.
And yeah if you can’t find 10 people it’s a problem, but that’s not the problem that flex ever claimed to solve. What it does solve is letting you have more than 10 people which means you’re more likely to have at least 10. Like say you’re guild is sitting at 15 people you could have a solid 1/3 of them have to miss and still not miss a raid, with fixed 10 man there is no raid.
Yes when people claim flex would help them find a group. Which people try to say all the time. And from where this argument started.
1 Like
Which flex absolutely does help with because raids aren’t locked into only having to take that minimum of 10 people.
Which helps with both recruiting for guilds and pugging.
I would argue for pugs that static size make it easier because then groups have to fill players to a certain amount. If you want more then 10 then you have to get up to 25. Moreover, this means that tank players are more needed which is a problem on retail with flex is that the ratio of dps/healers vs tanks get much lower with it. And there is a good amount of players that want to tank.
For guilds for sure it helps as you will have probably people on the bench, but to be fair like for me this only address guilds not doing the hardest content as I don’t see the hardest difficulty being ever flex for many reasons.
/shrug it shouldn’t be hard to understand why LF1M Tank or LF1M Healer stays just LFM Anything longer with flex.
Not sure why you think you have to go to 25 if you go over 10 that is absolutely not a requirement.
And yes flex was never intended for the hardest difficulty, it’s intended for people who don’t care about doing the hardest content that requires absolute min maxxing. And for that level of content it succeeds very well.
Even on retail pugging with flex can take a while, and with flex you still need a flex size of healers so you’re not solving that. But flex is very bad for people that want to tank and you won’t get as much people willing to give you a try if they don’t have to fill the group as much, hence flex made it so people would ask for higher credentials as they do not need you.
2 Likes
Tanking flex isn’t any worse than tanking for a non flex so not really sure what the issue is there. Especially since once again flex is not for the hardest content.
Just like how 10 and 25 man typically only need the same number of tanks the same applies to flex. So the only real concern is the ratio of healers to dps, and healers are easier to find than tanks.