This is a preview post that contains some details of possible rating for Icecrown Citadel.
I noticed that posts about rating rules usually became very hot as many people may not agree with current rules. Though the best time to voice your opinion is before the race started.
This article intended to gather feedback - everyone who don't agree - post your comments.
Basically ICC contains 4 wings and 1 final boss - the Lich King.
The Lower Spire
- Lord Marrowgar
- Lady Deathwhisper
- Icecrown Gunship Battle
- Deathbringer Saurfang
Plagueworks
- Rotface
- Festergut
- Professor Putricide *
Crimson Hall
- Blood Princes
- Blood-Queen Lana'thel *
Frostwing Halls
- Valithria Dreamwalker
- Sindragosa *
The Frozen Throne
* - limited attempt bosses
There are progression achievements for each wing for both normal and hard modes.
For instance:
The Frostwing Halls (25 player),
Heroic: The Frostwing Halls (25 player)
That means these achievements can be used to detect final boss kills in the wings while we can use internal achievement criteria to record kills of intermediate bosses.
Each boss will have nominal score attached. Next boss in the same wing will override previous one.
Example:
Rotface defeated - guild score is based on
Rotface nominal score
Festergut defeated - guild score is based on
Festergut nominal score
Professor Putricide defeated - guild score is based on
Professor Putricide nominal score
So when guild defeats Professor Putricide, they'll only receive points for this final boss and previous boss scores will disappear.
The reason is we saw sometimes achievement criteria can be buggy so we can't have 100% accuracy for intermediate bosses and it's better to use the final wing boss for final scoring.
I propose to bind limited attempt bosses to lockout rather than day. So if two guilds killed the boss in the same lockout (week) they will have the same score points even if the kill dates are different. This way guilds have flexibility planning their raids.
There could be exceptions though (Lich King for instance), because we would like to avoid situation where too many guilds have the same score points.
Please post your ideas in comments section if you have better solution.
Another question is whether to rank guilds solely based on Arthas kill date. I mean if a guild was slower on previous bosses but killed Arthas faster - should we rank them higher?
My opinion: yes, the final rating should be based on final boss kill date. Again, post a comment if you disagree.
In Ulduar we had several important encounters: Firefighter, Algalon, Yogg+0. So the final rating was based on score points.
In Icecrown we have 1 main boss and there should no backside hard bosses (like Yogg+0) as
the blueposter said that the 4 limited attempts bosses are the most difficult encounters.
Sure there could be different opinions. What if there will be a very hard boss within the 3 key bosses (like M'uru in Sunwell)? Well, in this case we can look at it and change the rules (though I would like to avoid changing rules in the middle)
Should we use different rules for normal mode and for hard mode? I don't see any reason why they should be different.
Sure, in hard mode you can skip some bosses and work only on the 4 main bosses.
But anyway, I think most progression guilds will have plan such as:
- clear the first mandatory(?) wing
- skip first hardmodes in wings 2-4
- try to kill the 3 final bosses that will unlock Lich King
- after attempts are exhausted, spend rest of the time in in other wings that weren't cleared yet (if there is any)
Intermediate hard mode rating will be based on how many hard modes are done. But then the final standings will be based on Lich King kill day.
Feel free to post your opinions here.
Kounamouta
Is anywhere a blue post, whether or not the icc is a linear instance or not?
Then you can choose between Plagueworks and Crimson Hall (and probably Frostwing Halls too).
I've updated the text.
Kounamouta
Imo it might be a good idea of awarding normal/heroic version of bosses with a different way. For normal what you suggest seems pretty ok (dissappearing previous boss award, when the next boss is killed), but for heroic modes i find it better all bosses to have a standard award, except the 3 bosses that are locked to limited attempts, which can be higher as they unlock eventually Arthas hard mode, which should be the highest value.
I think this can work better for whole base of servers (high/medium/low population), since not all guilds will focus asap to the limited attempts bosses hard modes.
Rapor9 months ago
a better way could be to value the bosses different, for example the first bosses in heroic only have ratings around 10 points, saurfang double this amount. The same way in the wings, the first bosses now give 25 points or something like that, professor / blood queen 50. the last bosses should be a lot higher, but the ratings of the other bosses still count into the aggregate rating. it wouldn't be a big difference in rating if first bosses give 20 or 50 points base when lich king has a base score of 250 ( for instance), but the "lower" bosses would still count into the rating.
Beatriks
Secondly normal and hardmode rules should be different aswell. Normal is more based on who spends the most time the fastest rather then the skills of a guild. So why reward guilds who shouldn't be so high for the extra time they spend just to score some extra ranks? The point and rank system should rewards guilds who are steady, and more skillfull rather then guilds who come and go in a few weeks time.
Just my 2 cents.
Firstaidspec
I'd like to avoid the Yogg0 situation from happening again.
Kluian
I like the continued idea that attempt limited bosses are based off the week, not kill date.
Just before the launch of T9 during the discussion about how that would be ranked, you had posted :
"The final encounter for 10-man will be A Tribute to Dedicated Insanity
Yes, there will 10-man ranking available soon and it will exclude guilds that are doing 25-man hard modes."
Except the 10 man only ranking excluding guilds with 25 man hard mode kills never made it live. Will it be possible for this system to be implemented for T10? It would be a much better way for the 10-man guilds to track progress against each other.
Its basically going to be a race to the final boss for the first wing, then people will catch up, another race the 2nd wing, the 3rd, etc since its a gated system. Once people start killing Arthas on normal, then the heroic race begins, guilds going for the ultimate prize will probably go straight for the 3 main ones that unlock Arthas. They should already have enough gear since you have been farming it for a few months prior due to gated system.
Bluedeep9 months ago
Arinya
Arinya
Unless LK hardmode doesn't override wing completion as a ranking criteria. (Or if it's like 1 light yogg compared to pre nerf Firefighter / 3 elders.)
In this case (hopefully, LK and each wing end boss wont be worlds apart appart in difficulty) I'd go with what you said, but totaling 5 end game criteria:
1 per completion of a wing and 1 for LK hardmode.
But unlike Algalon overriding Firefighter/3 elders/Thorim hard/Hodir hard completion, LK hard would represent a full criteria added along with full hardmode wing completions.
Each heroic boss kill is worth consideration, but wing completion should be the determinant milestones right ?
Maybe i'm just saying exactly what you already said, i just wasn't sure where you pictured LK Hardmode.
You dont need to complete the wing on hardmode to unlock LK, you need to kill it's last encounter on hard mode ( the ones with limited attempts) to unlock LK hardmode.
IF Unlocking LK hardmode, or Killing LK hardmode is worth alot more points or ranking than actually clearing wings fully on hard mode, alot of guilds are going to rush to the last bosses first to unlock and or kill LK on hardmode.
As far as Icecrown ranking goes, The gated system will prevent any kind of "skipping content to get the points that matter" behaviour.
And since we have to kill Arthas in normal to unlock heroic, you will have about 2 or 3 months to decide which way will be best to rank the guilds based on what we see inside icecrown
I do disagree on the weekly rather than nightly progression updating. I know on a server as competitive as mine is, we usually have anywhere from 3-6 guild(s) vying for server 1sts , and another 7 or so usually right on their tails.
I know we use this sight mainly for cross checking where our competition is vs where we are, as well as for recruitment purposes. I believe by leaving it on a daily update it makes the important gettable information easier to access.
Diamondtear
All bosses in a wing should matter and the sub bosses should be ranked daily. This is because better guilds will kill them faster thanks to unlimited tries and it should show in their ranking.
Limited tries -bosses should be ranked weekly. This is because even the best guilds will wait until they get the best possible raid that week and you don't want birthdays messing with rankings.
Arthas kill order (ranked weekly) should be the final ranking for WotLK. Thanks to the limited tries mechanic it will reflect overall skill of the guild and killing him first will require good performance throughout ICC.
I don't think there will be problems with guilds doing different wings in hard mode, but just in case you could have sub bosses in all the wings give the same amount of points with limited tries -bosses giving more (but equal among themselves).
Tattersail
And what about a guild formed near the end of the race, out of the ashes of 3 other pro guilds. They skip as many hardmodes as possible, and kill Arthas. Is that worth a top 50 ranking?
It doesn't compare well with sports either. The team that scores the _most_ wins, not the one to score last.
Diamondtear
If a guild formed out of ashes of pro guilds, they would have already killed the hard modes and would not skip them.
I don't see skipping happening at all really. If you can't kill the sub bosses in a week, skipping won't help you (it doesn't cost attempts to try the sub bosses).
Oh, and wins count for more in play-offs.
Ayarea
Weekly ranking based on kill times would work best due to guilds having different raid days.
Zing
It's a nice feature that we can now flag ourselves as ten man guilds but whilst ever we are ranked against the twenty five man teams, we can never get much sense of competitiveness in our field.
The recruitment tool is nice but give the ten man guilds a ranking system that runs alongside the twenty fives please!
Forreststump9 months ago
"Otherwise we might have guilds skipping Rotface and Festergut on hard mode and attempt to kill Professor Putricide hard mode first simply because he's worth more points on WoWProgress"
Human nature is to find the path of least resistance; "encouraging linearity" will help to foil that tendency.
禦生門浪紫
Finkill9 months ago
Couldn't have said it better.
Loralise
"My suggestion is to use WoWProgress' ranking system to encourage linearity in progression. The final ranking should not be based on an individual Putricide, Blood Queen, or Sindrgosa kill. The final rankings should be based upon the completion of an ENTIRE wing on heroic mode. Otherwise we might have guilds skipping Rotface and Festergut on hard mode and attempt to kill Professor Putricide hard mode first simply because he's worth more points on WoWProgress."
I agree with Bluedeep on the above.
Capnplanit
I completely agree with Bluedeep on this one as well. Many guilds would end up skipping the "unnecessary" bosses according to how WoWProgress ratings would work. It would make more sense, as Diamondtear has said, to rank sub-bosses daily and at a fixed rate that gives all of the sub-bosses in a wing the same amount of points which would decay over time. For those bosses with limited attempts, they should be ranked weekly as Kernel already suggested so that guilds can plan which days of the week they would like to attempt the bosses for more flexibility (ex. Tuesday = a lagfest that could prevent some guilds from killing a boss with limited attempts due to something uncontrollable. Why would a guild want to potentially waste what few attempts it has on a boss with limited attempts?) This would further help to limit the number of guilds that would have the same number of ranked points.
There could be exceptions though (Lich King for instance)[/quote]
Yes Please.
Guild rankings should be based on lookout periods rather than the killday.
I enjoy linearity in progression and hope that hardmode Arthas is the most difficult encounter. I think it feels best to have the final rank be completing all content on hardmode not just Arthas. I would like to the wing achievements and the final, all hardmodes completed achievement ranked by week and not by day.
I don't know what the best tiebreaker is, guilds will want whatever gives them the most favorable entry into it. T9 progress feels like the most logical choice since it's an absolute answer, however there are probably guilds who feel that Insanity was dumb and want to use another system.
I don't think normal mode progress can really be used to tiebreak anything especially if killing a boss on hardmode doesn't give you the normal mode achievement as well. It would be dumb to have to hurt your tiebreaking power by killing a hardmode. Should the ranking be number of wings completed on hardmode, tiebreak first completed wing regardless of which one it is by T9, then tiebreak second completed wing by week of first completed wing, tiebreak T9 in the case of both wings being done the same week, etc? This is the best approach I can think of if the popular opinion is for ranking hardmode achievements by week.
Another approach could be to just rank by total bosses killed on hardmode if the statistic is tracked and all that, but that seems a little messier than by wing and has the same essential end result.
I feel much more strongly about ranking progress by week than by the criteria of what is ranked by week.
Kluian
I agree with everyone above about how all hard-modes should count towards a guilds ranking, not just the final 3 of the 3 wings and Arthas.
Kluian
That said, limited attempts certainly curtails that habit, so I am willing to accept that a guild's ranking be based on Arthas alone. Though I hope you do something neat post-Icecrown, such as an aggregate score combining all previous dungeons to see how guilds actually performed over the course of the expansion. Once again, I feel a total summation throughout WotLK would be a better reflection of a guild's total ranking in the grand scheme of things.
Whatever you ultimately decide, I hope another guild doesn't get screwed in the way Paragon did during ToC.
Thix
Stauros
"The wings really should be considered arbitrary, just areas of the dungeon created for RP. From a raid perspective and how progress should be measured, the dungeon is three categories; 8 unlimited attempts bosses, 3 limited attempts gatekeepers, and Arthas. If you look at it this way progress is easily measured at the end of each lockout based on total kills in each category and when you kill Arthas. It also sets up better for guilds to excel in the category they are good at, zerg vs limited attempts."
The basic question is whether a ranking should focus on the limited attempt bosses, and thus measure skill and efficiency, or whether a ranking should also include unlimited attempt bosses, and thus also include the time effort spent by a guild.
I prefer a ranking that measures skill and efficiency in the first place. So, that's a ranking that focuses on the limited attempt bosses.
The undesirable "rush to Arthas" effect of this ranking can be avoided by treating Arthas like any other limitted attempt boss and bind his score to the lockout. This opens up a window for top tier guilds to work on optional heroic modes without endangering their ranking. The combined score from these optional heroic modes can then be used to differentiate the ranking among guilds that killed Arthas in the same lockout. The resulting ranking is still heavily focused on efficiency as the number of optional heroic modes completed in the first couple of heroic IDs is a measure of efficiency, too.
Loralise
I'd love to see something like this in the next expansion. Would be nice to see guilds rewarded for completing all content. Not enough that a guild that came together in ICC for example, could get a significant boost for doing Naxx/Uld/ToC, but that the scores across the board would reflect a difference in score for those that did take the time to do that, over those who didn't.
Some guilds just dropped Uld entirely when ToC came out, regardless of progress, others continued to work on both, and would be nice to see something in an over-all score that shows the difference.
Gemg9 months ago
clear any wing - rank by points
kill arthas normal - rank by week
kill any hard mode - rank by points
Gemg9 months ago
Rassoodocks
Chances are a natural kill order will form based on the individual difficulty of the unlimited attempt encounters, anyway.
Dethkrik
Rassoodocks
Diamondtear
Telza7 months ago
This might be a beaten dead horse but, my guild raids casually in comparison to some of the standard top 5 guilds. We took a day off from killing professor and tried him 7pm on a Wednesday and killed him on our 3rd pull. Leaving us with a world 3rd kill, The majority of other guilds world wide have made their ability to log on and early morning bash content plenty clear. It was also clear that the current content was beatable and if progression really mattered to a guild the professor fight could be easily beaten.
This change sets up a poor precedent for current progression and management of rankings for a site that is nearing a raiding standard site on par with elitist jerks. Progression should be; the current tier, the time you beat the boss and that's it. If you don't raid in time to beat a boss world first, then so be it. I truly feel that since the current set up for raiding via encounters makes content easy enough that at least the people still willing to get a world first should be acknowledged via timestamps and dates otherwise I'm not really getting news on progression. I'm getting some kind of math lesson on averages and previous tier rankings. To put it simply, I don't care about previous rankings in beaten farmed content. I didn't care about BWL rankings when AQ40 came out and I didn't care about AQ40 rankings when Naxx came out.
A new instance is a time for when the slate is washed clean and guilds prove them selves once again. If previous content is used as a backdrop this early on then why would guilds not named ensidia, premo and juggernaught want to try and push content that matters?
Because as it stands, there is little point to do so.
Just think of it logically, what if a new hot guild appears on the scene, wipes the floor with all the content, first night kills, before other guilds even attempt the boss. Before videos and strats are out, etc. Eventually, down the line, the rest of the top guilds kill these bosses. Because this guild is NEW, they will be ranked at the very bottom of the top. How is that even remotely fair?
Diamondtear
You managed to do 3rd kill and now you come and complain about the rankings calling it "poor precedent"? Why should I pay attention to this pushing?
As is, ranking for T10 is completely, 100% reflective of T9. Why not simply call it T9.5? =P Since regardless of what happens in ICC, it doesn't matter because your ranking in T9 is mirroring things now.
I heard a suggestion from a friend. Right now, if Guild A kills Putricide on Tuesday, Guild B killed on Tuesday and Guild C killed on Saturday. Since Guild C won the race for Insanity in T9, they're automatically ranked above everybody else. What about introducing a diminishing returns during a lockout. So Tuesday could be worth X points, Wednesday slightly less, Thursday even less, etc.. That was about the only thing I've heard which made sense. But who knows. Thoughts?
Konstantinos
Guild C had Putricide raid in Saturday and also killed him within 10 attempts.
What's the difference between these guilds?
Daily points will be introduced later (probably from Sindragosa) after more attempts available.
Killing a boss with less information is a reflection of skill and learning curve.
Includes bosses:
- Deathbringer Saurfang
- Putricide
- Blood-Queen Lana'thel
- Sindragosa
- Lich King
Note that timestamp still doesn't change your score point so it won't be transmitted to next wing.
Kluian
After the next wing unlocked and the next bosses down, Putricide kill order won't influnce the ranking. Instead, Blood Queen kill order will define the ranking in case points are the same.
What matters is whether you were able to defeat the limited attempt bosses in the first week (or in the second week, etc). It will affect your points. And points + kill order of the last boss defines the ranking.
I'm not sure yet about hard mode details.
Any hard mode boss will override normal mode.
Probably every hard mode boss will grant points. Limited attempt bosses will be based on lockout.
And the same rule for ranking: points + kill order of the last boss.
Kluian
Limited boss attempt hard-modes will give points based on look-out.
If a guild for some reason is tied, the ranking is based on the last limited kill (timestamp) with higher priority going...
1) LK (Heroic)
2) Sindragosa (Heroic)
3) Blood Queen (Heroic)
4) Putricide (Heroic)
5) LK (Normal)
==============================================
If this is true, then 2 scenarios need clarification on.
Guild A kills the first four hard-modes. Their total is 250 points.
Guild B only kills Putricide heroic. Their total is 250 points.
Guild B is ranked higher than guild A.
=========================================
Guild A kills the first four hard-modes. Their total is 250 points.
Guild B only kills Putricide heroic. Their total is 245 points.
Guild A is ranked higher than Guild B
Bluedeep7 months ago
Alternatively if you don't want to tinker with the system once the heroic race starts, then heroic bosses that have no recorded kills in the world could have a base point value that automatically grows per week until the world first kill occurs.
Deathound
I'll repeat my previous comment:
What matters is whether you were able to defeat the limited attempt bosses in the first week (or in the second week, etc). It will affect your points.
Guilds are ranked by points and then by timestamp of the last boss (currently Putricide).
After the next wing unlocked and the next bosses down, Putricide kill order won't influnce the ranking. Instead, Blood Queen kill order will define the ranking in case points are the same.
That's it. And keep in mind that the rules are only for normal mode (I'm not sure yet about heroic mode details).
Would like some clarification on this.
Putricide points + Blood Queen points = total, then ties are broken based on time stamp of BQ kill?
or
Blood Queen points overwrite Putricide points and essentially you have; Blood Queen points = total points, then ties are broken based on time stamp of BQ kill?
I know there's been talk of Arthas kill overwriting everything, so I was unsure if these wings will continue to overwrite each other in terms of points. I know Saurfang was overwritten, in terms of points, with Putricide (although this isn't the best example b/c Saurfang isn't a limited attempt boss).
Veyril7 months ago
I think you can also look at it from the following fundamental viewpoint. Progression is killing bosses to get loot so you can kill bosses that drop better loot. Killing it tuesday or killing it friday nets you the same chance at loot from that boss, you don't actually lose your chance until the lockout resets.
Kluian
Oh well atleast this will mostly only affect Normal mode kills, and shouldn't be too big of an issue in hard-modes if they aren't pushovers.
There has to be a tie-breaker, everyone agrees to that. Any intelligent person would also agree that kill date on a new boss is more relevant than the kill date of a boss in the last tier.
Yes, it sucks your instance sucks. I hardly doubt a server transfer would break the bank for your raiders.
Phasmy7 months ago
Tangseng
Can you fix our guild's rank?
Its been two days now, but we cant even get an update of our guild's progress.
We killed Blood Princes on the day when Crimson Hall was available to all the US realms.
I dont know where to post, so I post it here. Hopefully, you dont mind.
Thank you!
Tortheldrin
Dragon Souls
Tangseng
Our guild ranking is now finally updated, but it works Badly for us!
Now my guild is ranked 1000 in the world, but definitely we should ranked as higher as the other two horde guilds on our server, which are Predestined and Thunderstruck. They all ranked as world 100 something.
When my guild killed the Princes on the day that Crimson Hall was available to all the US realms, I checked this site; and it shows that only 50 something guilds in the world have killed Princes. I understand that there might be many other top guilds which couldn't get an update at that moment just like us did. Yet they still got their REAL rankings.
My point is that if a guild killed a boss eailer than many guilds, but they just cant get an update here on this side due to server Lag or something for almost 3 days. Will they still get ranked higher than other guilds which got an update eailer, but didnt killed the boss faster by that guild?
I just dont know why it takes 2 days and half to get a server response in order to get an update of my guild.
-------------please dont look at my character's recent activities on wowarmory, the time it shows is wrong for Blood Princes kill. Yet my other guildies' time for that kill are right.---------
Your real Putricide rank is 353, plus you killed Blood Princes day later than many other guilds killed them.
So you are ranked based on Putricide timestamp among those who killed Blood Princes on the 2nd day and that makes you 622.
If you'll manage to kill Blood Queen this week, you'll be ranked among those who killed Putricide on the 2nd week and the tiebreaker will be Blood Queen timestamp.
Tangseng
I know it will take a lot of your time if you look into my guild's issue, but I really hope that you will look into it. It really influences some of our players' motivation.
Thank you very much.
Juggerdin7 months ago
Rank the guilds after what they deserve instead of the servers ability to work during progress!
Diamondtear
Kolie
Also, how do you plan on dealing with this new 5% dmg buff? From what I understand, there's no legitimate way of tracking it on Armory besides the Feat of Strength for Invincible. Is it just assumed from this point on that points will be subtracted for kills post March 2nd / March 3rd resets and that everyone should just take advantage of the existing buffs?
You get less points if boss down lockout later -> You get less points if you kill the boss with the buff.
As discussed, we count all heroic mode bosses.
Because all hard mode kills are scores, the cumulative scores of all the hard mode bosses significantly out-weights the end-wing bosses.
I understand the ranking will eventually solely base on hard mode lich king 25 kills. But in the interim I think only end-wing bosses should count towards scoring for hard modes.
Veyril6 months ago
Veyril6 months ago
I think listening to this is the easiest way to make things more accurate rather than changing the whole system. Drastically reducing points for Blood Queen and possibly increasing points for Lady Deathwhisper and Saurfang is a good solution if you don't want to change the whole system. I am assuming you do keep in good communication with high ranked guilds and understand how it is silly to give the same point values to Blood Queen vs. Sindragosa or Deathwhisper vs. Rotface, etc...
This 5% buff is huge. It's the same as a drastic nerf to the bosses, making Putricide far easier to kill. When there was a huge nerf to 0 lights you drastically reduced the point value. Why not the same treatment here?
"Yogg+0 post nerf nominal score has been updated to 250 (down from 500). So now the guilds that have done it before nerf will be ranked higher." Quote from your site regarding 0 Lights.
Why are you not doing the same thing here? Guilds who killed these bosses before the buff went in should be rewarded for that.
Take Pacifism (3/12) yet because of the way your ranking worked out, they put an emphasis on Sindragosa, Putricide and BQL. They didn't work on anything else yet you really think they should be ranked higher than a guild that is 10/12? You supposedly count all hard mode bosses into a ranking. It does not appear to be functioning the way it's intended. What's the point of even doing any hardmodes other than the 3 end bosses + LK if none of them are taken into account into the overall rank?
They didn't kill Lich King in the first ID and stand now before guilds to have done?
You kick those some fraction change go through and to Premenition has itself another equivalent means served, thus belong also kickt!
1. It's ridiculous to be ranked below guilds who had to skip bosses that don't even have limited-attempts.
2. It's stupid to be ranked below guilds because they killed Sindragosa before us when we killed every other boss in the instance before them.
3. Are we seriously ranked below guilds who got hard mode kills after the 5% zone buff? Are you seriously serious?
4. Are there guilds who couldn't kill Lich King on normal mode the first week above us? Is that a joke?
Quick question. If we killed every boss in the instance except Sindragosa before another guild, then we went on to kill Sindragosa before they killed Putricide, should we be ranked lower? If we were 11/12 Heroic 12th in the world should we be ranked 26th? I don't think it takes a calculus major for that one. There are at least 10 guilds above us who didn't kill a single boss before us except Sindragosa and we still beat them to 11/12. Yea, I'm a little angry.
It's really simple to figure out. Go to this link: http://www.wowprogress.com/guild/us/alterac-mountains/vodka
Now compare those numbers to any guild between approximately 7th or 8th and 25th. Don't worry, you won't need a calculator. It's just common sense.
Sidenotes:
Blood Queen hard mode took us 3 pulls and Sindragosa hard mode took us 2. I'm not stroking my epeen, just pointing out that both fights are jokes compared to Putricide. Likewise, Lady D and Saurfang are notably more difficult than the other non-attempt limited bosses. Festergut is a bit more difficult than most non-attempt limited bosses as well, but overall he's joketown.
4. Are there guilds who couldn't kill Lich King on normal mode the first week above us? Is that a joke?
It is a joke that Premonition are Ranked! The Guild have`t kill Lick King before 16 Feb 2010! Those did not have an authorization for the hero mode.
It is BS that guilds who killed the 11th boss a week late is ranked higher than a guild who has cleared 11/12 a week prior.
Yes I totally agree with this. Our guild spent a lot of time on both Lady D and Saurfang. Maybe we should have just skipped them and go after the point pinetas first
11/12 rank should trump points rank.
This will mitigate the effect of kill-order choices guilds made along the way of reaching 11/12
a guild who has not killed Lick King before heromode kills actually no authorization would have to be listed!
Blood Legion or Deus Vox are ranked below the cheating Guild of Premonition at the same stat 11/12! That is incomprehensible!
So thats not fair again the other Guilds who have killed LK and other Guilds they haven`t kill LK! So they must remove from the Ranking!
How about you stop assigning arbitrary numbers to everything that change week by week?
I would also agree that 11/12 H should be a milestone as well, but if heroic LK isn't, then I wouldn't expect to see it for anything else.
No top guild didn't kill Sindragosa on 10 man the first week because they couldn't, they did it because they were focusing on 25 man. It is only fair to based the Lich King rank on exact date and time.
As a kicker we even have HM gunship but as still placed below guilds with no LK kills.
http://www.wowprogress.com/pve/us/maiev
Sated should logically be placed ahead of any other guild on this server
Come on.
Killmorez
Tangseng
I cant get our guild's progess update here. We are 8/12 heroic ICC 25 now, but it still shows that we are 5/12 heroic ICC(25). When I clicked ths update button on the Web, it just didnt work.
Could you please fix this for us?
Tortheldrin(US)
Dragon Souls
Thank you.
We can't seem to be able to get WoWprogress to ever count our Marrowgar(h) 25 kill despite the fact that we finished Storming the Citadel last night by killing Lady Deathwhisper. Could look into this and correct it? We're listed as 8/12 when we should be 9/12.
Mal'Ganis(US)
Extreme
Thanks.
Arv
Here we are at the end of August and I find your weightings a little troubling.
As of today, August 27th, there are 3824 guilds (5.76%) that have killed Heroic Sindragosa and 4540 guilds (6.84%) that have killed Heroic Putricide.
While the kills favored Putricide being slightly more difficult for the first three months of ICC, it hasn't scaled similarly and Sindragosa now is seemingly 20% more difficult if going by the percentage of guilds that have killed her. As there isn't too much difficulty difference between the two, yet Sindragosa is obviously harder at the present time, how do you justify Putricide being worth twice as many points?
The inappropriateness of your point distribution makes your rankings trivial at best if you weren't 11/12 in the first three months of the boss release as the chart shows a variance from the difficulty you have assigned to the bosses.
I don't know how easy it is for you to make the two bosses equal in points or the effects that it will have upon your ranking system, but I find your system quite faulty when considering how the rankings stack for kills after mid May's 20% ICC buff.
Good luck in optimizing your system and I look forward to your justification of why your points haven't reflected (or at least changed with) the actual difficulty of the encounters.
Thanks.