Tobold's Blog
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
 
Time to complete BC 5-mans

A reader wrote to me
How about an article about time-length of Outland instance runs. I'm a casual player. Married to a tolerant non-gamer, two kids. I probably play 2-3 times a week for 1.5 hours at a stretch. My Shaman is 62, but I've only completed one instance (ZF). I've also mostly completed SFK and ST.

I had read that Blizzard intended that BC 5-mans would be much shorter. And someone in the Shaman forums said the same thing. That a good group can clear a non-heroic in 45-60 minutes. Is this your experience? I've tried Ramparts on two separate occasions, but both groups fell apart. (The latter was this weekend... my Elemental Shaman (MH) and the Dual-Wielding Warrior (tank) knew what we were doing but were improperly spec'ed, exactly like your recent post).

Anyway, if you have any thoughts on time-to-complete of BC 5-mans, I'd love to read them.
While we are in the middle of a heated debate on difficulty of 5-man groups, we tend to forget some basic truths. The most basic truth about instances is that playing in a group is more difficult than playing solo. Which for many of us is actually the attraction of it. A solo combat, only you against a single mob, is easy to the point of being boring. You know your spells and abilities, there usually aren't all that many of them, and most of the time you have a generous amount of time to hit the next button. One time this week I started a combat with my warrior against an even level demon, and after the first few exchanges of blows, my connection broke down. Had to reboot the computer and log back in, only to find that the warrior had won the combat in my absence, just by auto-attack. (Don't try that with a mage).

Group combat is a lot more difficult. Basically it is all about aggro management, forcing the mobs to keep hitting the tank with the high damage absorption capacity, and not the squishy mages and healers. That means that people have to time their spells better, for example not use their largest damage abilities right at the start before the tank has aggro. There is a lot more coordination required, giving you less time to decide on the right action and less room for error. You can't simply have 5 people doing the same as they would do in a solo combat.

Fighting in an instance with a group being more difficult and there being a higher chance to wipe has a big impact on how long it takes to complete a dungeon. I simply don't feel comfortable saying "you can do Hellfire Ramparts in 60 minutes". I know *I* can do Hellfire Ramparts in 60 minutes, in a guild group, especially if I'm going with my warrior and am able to set the pace. (When I'm playing my priest I have a lot less influence on the pace, as I shouldn't pull.) But if you go with a pickup group, Hellfire Ramparts can easily take 2 hours instead of 1.

Group coordination being so essential, and difficult, going somewhere with guild mates, people you already played with, is making things a lot easier. Coordination is something that needs a bit of practice. In the ideal case you get a pickup group where all the players are playing reasonably well, somebody is taking the lead, and after a few combats the coordination works well enough. More commonly coordination takes a couple of wipes, learning from mistakes, because everyone in the group isn't the most experienced group player, and nobody is really leading, or some people don't follow the leader's instructions. Every wipe costs some time.

And then, you already mentioned it, is the possibility of pickup groups falling apart. You wipe a few times, and somebody gets fed up and leaves. Or somebody has something real life coming up, like a kid having forgotten all about dinner time and his parents forcing him to quit playing. When somebody leaves at the very least you'll need some time to replace him, and if you can't find a replacement fast, other people are likely to leave and the whole group falls apart. So the time to complete that dungeon goes up to forever.

While I can't tell you exactly how long you'll need for the Burning Crusade instances, I can tell you that they are significantly shorter than the old world dungeons. 5-man instances in Burning Crusade all have between 2 and 4 bosses, with most having 3 of them. That makes them about half the size of Zul'Farrak, and needing only half the time. Which is a nice improvement from Blizzard, as it gives people with shorter playing sessions a better shot at being able to finish a dungeon.
Comments:
That goes without saying.

Most guilds also had to fail a bunch of times before they could get things right, especially with the good old wipe and respawn problems that happen with most MMOs.
 
The big disadvantage with such short dungeons, is that they don't contain much loot, there are hardly any quests, and also they get old very quickly.

At least with Black Rock Depths/Sunken Temple and so on, you could be exploring the place over a number of different visits.

Went to the Black Morass yesterday (we failed as our DPS just wasn't high enough), and I am bored of that place after just one evening.
Clearing the spiders, crocs and cats at the beginning has to be one of the most tedious things ever done in WoW.
 
Unless of course the designers had thought of this, and put a lot of short dungeons right next to each other, and provided easy ways to get back to the beginning in many cases.

Oh they did. Clever them.
 
At least with Black Rock Depths/Sunken Temple and so on, you could be exploring the place over a number of different visits.

I must agree that old world instances had more immersion and sense of adventure. The newer ones makes me think "Yay, I'm entering a tube again..." I'm sure any RPG devotee has fond memories of choosing if they should to go left or right. :)

(Of course old world dungeons felt more connected to the world as well, new ones not so. But that's a problem with whole of Outland IMO)
 
Unless of course the designers had thought of this, and put a lot of short dungeons right next to each other, and provided easy ways to get back to the beginning in many cases.

Too bad those dungeons tend to be for different player levels.
 
Agreed that the new dungeons are a lot more linear. Nothing like BRD, where there were half a dozen different paths you could take. On the other hand, in BRD getting to the Emperor at the very end took too long, and most people stopped before the Lyceum. So shorter, but linear dungeons have both advantages and disadvantages.

The different wings argument doesn't hold, because you wouldn't go with the same group to ramparts, furnace, shattered halls and Magtheridon. The wings of the BC dungeons have a larger level difference than the Scarlet Monastery wings had.
 
Most of these new zones are designed as forced progression ones not like the old scarlet monastery: you did the quest and your kinda done with the zone. If your lucky, one run and you will never set a foot in it again.

What blizzard did in BC is to take that concept but mix it with progression and as we see, that's not a good idea. They also took out the quest rewards and put them into loot tables. Again bad idea, just look at Tobolds last "less random loot" entry.

We see two things mixed here, wich does not go well with each other: shorter instance runs, mixed with heavy progression. Problem is you can not play one black morass and call it a day, like you could with the monastery or blackrocks. You are forced to run these zones over and over again, to gear up and to gain faction. In case of the Naaru trials it gets even more demanding, you are forced to clear those same old instances in heroic mode within a time limit. Anyone who did the old 45 minute baron run in Stratholme may remember who much "fun" it was and what an uproar this started within the non hardcore folks. Those trials are baron runs on drugs.

Shorter dungeon runs are good. The idea to take those runs into account to design progression is bad. Zones that you are forced to play should add more diversity and yes this also means longer playtimes.
 
The number of variables in the runs is astounding. For instance, I ran Sethekk Halls for the first time last week. I ended up having to leave a bit before the 2nd boss just because the run was taking so long (regardless of my prodding and informing the group of my deadline to leave). Lots of down time, lots of discussions. This is a place with 2 bosses, there is no earthly reason it should take more than an hour and we were 90 minutes in without being at the 2nd boss yet.

So my 2nd visit to the Halls, about 2 days later, I just started pulling like a madman. Sap one target, attack another target, force the warrior to jump in and tank. About 40 minutes in, we'd passed the point I was at when I left the run 2 days earlier, with no wipes. Of course, then the warrior had to leave and the run completely folded, but que sera.
 
Shadow Labs with random pug - 3-4 hours.

Shadow Labs with guild group, even poorly geared one - 2-2.5 hours.

A lot of the issue with the instances is also with the learning curve of getting to know the other people in your group's playing style.
 
Great topic. I'm finding the dungeons more linear, but tightly packed with mobs in some cases. So instead of finding your way around in say BRD, you're dealing with pack after pack of birds (Sethekk Halls - short in distance, but a beating packwise) or silly heathens praying (Shadow Labs). Regardless of dungeon, it's hard to complete in exactly an hour, given the factors of getting to the instance, assigning roles/targets, people going afk, making water, buffing. I try and give myself 1.5-2 hour window regardless of instance, with exceptions being Shadow Labs (please remove some mobs from that dang Inciter room) and the Netherstorm floating instances. Those tend to take a bit longer than most.

I'd say my personal best instance run times were found in Steamvaults. With a VERY skilled prot pally, holy priest, mage, and 2 feral cat and some OT druiding, we killed all bosses (3) in just slightly over an hour. This was a PUG as well, which I promptly added all of them to my friends list. Steamvaults is rather forgiving in the amount of mob packs and alternate path to bosses (namely #2 via the water) not to mention we had plenty of dps and crowd control in the form of a sheep and OTs.
 
In a good group, you can do any of the BC 5-mans in under an hour. I've been in 45-minute groups for Shadow Lab, Arcatraz, and Shattered Halls. Alas, in a typical group of average players with real-life obligations it will take 2 or more hours.

I agree that making people run the same content over and over is a bad idea when that content isn't designed for heavy repetition.

I thought the BC 5-mans were all very well designed... as "play a few times" dungeons. Blizzard used to have two kinds of dungeons. They divided dungeons into places you went a few times levelling up for quests, etc. and dungeons you went back to over and over. In BC, they designed lots of great "do-once" dungeons, but then make the players run them over and over... But hey didn't make any dungeons that are designed to return to multiple times. It's a step backwards in design.

But, apparently, if you can't run the content faster than the respawns, it's a useful indicator of how much you suck:

http://blue.cardplace.com/newcache/us/86814433.htm

That's a perfect example of why I cancelled my account.
 
I'm honestly astounded at the complaints that "casuals" are burned out on the 5 man instances. I still haven't even entered half of the instances, have done a handful of them twice and have done 1 of them three times (well, 2 and a half).

The main complaint I remember hearing from "casuals" was that the raiders kept getting new and shiny instances while the 5-10 man instances were getting old and they didn't have anything new to do. Honestly, it seemed a valid complaint. But 2+ months into the expansion, this many new instances and people are already complaining that they're burning out on it?

C'mon. If you've devoured all of the quests and devoured all of the instances at this point just stop calling yourself casual. Please.

I get that running Scholomance for the 100th time seemed like cruel and unusual punishment. I have a hard time feeling like Black Morass is just as cruel the 6th.
 
"The different wings argument doesn't hold, because you wouldn't go with the same group to ramparts, furnace, shattered halls and Magtheridon. "

"Too bad those dungeons tend to be for different player levels. "

Perhaps I am missing something, but ramparts and furnace (and similarly slave pens and underbog) have heroic modes. So you can do at least 3 of the 4 wings at 70 in both ?? The first two are similar levels, so even at early 60 you can run both in a session.
 
Alba brings up a good point that I've tried to correct in my own speech. For some people casual meant played few hours. For others, like myself, it meant not hardcore raider. I used to play WO 20-30 hrs a week and called myself casual. I realized that I was probably not really casual as I consume a lot of content, I just didn't want the only thing at the end to be raiding.

To your point of TBC 5-man feeling old after the 6th time is, yes, it can feel that way because it's sooooooooo linear. The point for me is that I don't have to justify when the content is boring. When it is, it is. If it's the 10th time in Scholo or the 5th in HF - it is what it is, and when people get bored, they will eventually stop playing/paying.

I feel like I see more people in the guild on alts than I ever saw before. You have to beg, borrow and steal to get 10 mans going. That's a TBC design problem, not a player problem.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home
Newer›  ‹Older

  Powered by Blogger   Free Page Rank Tool