I’m new-ish to the game and raiding, but after doing 2/10 mythic CN with my guild and feeling like those two aren’t harder than Heroic Sire where I got my kill in a pug, I’ve been wondering what the point of the server restriction is for Mythic. It feels like it just makes pugging the raid nearly impossible where 2/10 could be a pretty realistic goal for committed people who need to pug because of scheduling.
Has there ever been any rationale from Blizzard? Is it just incentive for people to pay for server transfers?
Its something not only been given a ratinale by blizzard but asked for by the player base.
Its to make guilds more attractive than just being able to pug everything. Its one of the last holdouts that make guilds quite attractive and keeps server mattering.
You still get to be able to pug mythic all you want after 100 CE for your faction but if you want to be a mythic raider you are not meant to be pugging it, you are meant to find a raiding guild and join it.
People joining guilds also further increases there liklyhood of people staying subscribed as they stay after meeting there goals to work on the goals of there friends and play with them. This is part of the reason on why blizzard wants you into a guild and set raid team.
1 Like
I think we should to look at adjusting the amount of time that needs to pass before it becomes PUGable.
I personally see no reason for it to remain server locked after the world first race is done. If they want it to go on a little bit longer than that, they could do it until the top 10 guilds have beaten it, or they could go with a flat unlock of say 2 or 4 weeks after the mythic raid launched. I don’t know how long it normally takes for 100 guilds of each faction to clear, but I just don’t see any reason for it to be that long of a lockout.
People like to bash on PUGing but I actually like it in many circumstances. It gives me an opportunity to meet new people. Sometimes they’ll friend you or invite you to a private Community or Discord so you can continue to play with them.
Being able to PUG Mythic raids earlier isn’t going to take away from those who only want to do it with the same group of people every week; they are still going to do it that way. It’s the opposite actually - those of us who don’t mind PUGing stuff are being forced to wait a lot longer to do it the way we want. I don’t believe that one playstyle is better or more important than the other, and don’t see a reason the game shouldn’t compensate for both, in a more balanced way.
Just as many people disagree with that as support to the point when the change was org made and discussions where happening to get said change one of the most supported ideas was last tier content opened and this tier locked.
100 Ce was blizzards number and works quite well not quite next tier content out but long enough to complete the goal of making guilds wanted.
Just for the world first is way to short as that dose not complete the goal of making guilds wanted as it’s over in a week.
Like I just said, NOT joining a guild is a PLAYSTYLE, exactly the same as the playstyle of joining one.
You aren’t going to convince me there’s any difference between a Guild, a Community, and a Discord. I have guild names turned off in-game, I could care less what guild anyone is in. The only difference with a Community and Discord is that your character’s name doesn’t advertise them and you don’t get a miniscule amount of perks like reduced Healthstone cooldown. And it’s not like being a part of a Community prevents you from being a part of a guild.
Besides, the logic doesn’t check out. If being a part of a community makes people play the game and subscribe longer, then shouldn’t opening up WAY more possibilities of being a part of one for mythic raiding also increase play/subscription times?
That’s your view and that’s fine.
Fact is that is the reason for it and getting in a guild is the play style blizzard wants and people have supported asking blizzard to not kill of as already to many things make guilds not needed. This makes recruitment harder and as such was killing of guilds. Mythic raiding is pritty well the only activity that needs a guild and that is fine. The playerbase showed a fair bit of backlash to people suggesting making mythic cross realm when they where doing it for heroic and again when it was made that mythic went after 100 Ce.
My logic checks out fine if you don’t understand it not going to waste my time convincing you the call has already been made and not likly to. Hangs was only here answering the ops question of there not only is a blizzard statment but further support from the community for the way it is.
If you have no response to “If being a part of a community makes people play the game and subscribe longer, then shouldn’t opening up WAY more possibilities of being a part of one for mythic raiding also increase play/subscription times?”
then no, the logic doesn’t check out.
And it doesn’t matter what Blizzard has said in the past, or that the community supposedly said they didn’t want cross-server Mythic raiding. The last 16 years is proof of that. It would be silly not to voice an opinion or desire based on the idea that change can’t or won’t happen, that’s a pretty good way to achieve exactly that.
Community raiding is kind of how FFXIV works. Raid groups there are organized in Linkshells which are kind of like communities and guilds are Free Companies which seem like they’re just social groups and shared housing for most people with small buffs.
Maybe if guilds had something like shared housing in WoW, it would keep them alive (albeit with a different role) regardless of opening the flood gates on Mythic raiding. I know player housing was a long requested thing, and it’ll probably never happen at this point, so it’s kind of irrelevant.
Anyway, that’s just where my perspective comes from. Compared to Square-Enix, Blizzard seems arbitrarily restrictive about certain things and I’m just having trouble coming up with reasons why. I didn’t want to cynically jump to the conclusion that it was based on selling services or any dev’s personal preference.