Quote:
Originally Posted by mickmoranis
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Look at it like this.
take all the mechanics in SG and all the mechanics in HS, make the mobs hit for the same, make them all HT the same, make them have all the same MR resists.
Which zone would be more difficult? The one that has 8 no rent keys for 99% of the zone? or the one where you can use water and dry land to expoit pathing, faction, and no keys at all?
one of those zones will end catastrophic log off naked failure and the other will result in some nice chap waltzing up to your corpses, draggin them back and then u all having another go at it.
HS > SG by far
Just because SG is broken and designed poorly doesnt mean its a harder zone, its just a broken zone with terrible mob stats that make it a waste of anyones time, not to mention the loot is pretty shit, you aint going to be leaving there with some treasure to sell from a PUG
|
This is nonsense, man. "If we normalize all the dungeons, which one is hardest?" isn't the title of the thread or what the OP talks about. He talks about appropriate level and gear of the group.
If you wanted to do that, Kerra Isle would be the worst. Have you ever seen that fucking zone? Imagine it full of level 50-55 rangers, shamans, clerics, wizards... with all the pathers running around with sow and blinds/roots/snares/dots/heals/slows... all fully shaman buffed? Lol. Only mitigating factor would be outdoors so harmony pulls.
That'd be fun though, considering what different dungeons would play out like if you scaled their levels. Kerra or kurns at 55? Seb at 20? Haha.