Talk:Instances by level

Requirement
Hey, I changed the minimum level requirements for RFK and BFD from 17 to 15 and 19 to 10 respectively. After running them on my lowbies I noticed that their values of 17 and 19 were incorrect. ~RaGiNsOuLz

Got a quick Question : The page states "Numbers after the instance name indicate the minimum level to enter, if known; and the recommended level range (in parentheses).

Examples: Ragefire Chasm (RFC) 8 (13-16, 20) The Scarlet Monastery:Armory (SM Arm) 20 (33-37) (?) The Scarlet Monastery:Cathedral (SM Cath) 20 (37-40) (?) My question is what is up with the 20 on the end of RFC and the (?) on the end of SMs? -Ledeas

Updated level requirements for ZG and MC. I only updated the Zone In requirement.

While I didn't update it I'd like your feedback, for the heroic Outlands, one would assume the zone requirements are the same as their non-heroic counterpart, but it's pretty darn hard to prove this. Any thoughts? LikwidFlux 13:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

1. I've put RFD after SM, because a lot of people do the quest to kill Amnennar the Coldbringer after completing the SM quests. (Bring the Light) (Bring the End)

2. I've put ST after ZFK and Maraudon, because there is a chained quest that leads you from ZFK into ST. (Screecher Spirits)

3. I've gone through the Blizzard instance information and updated the levels recommended.

4. Since patch 1.10 the player cap in LBRS / UBRS has been dropped to 10, and the player caps have also been dropped in BRD, DM, Strat and Scholo.

5. The Blizzard instance page has some correct level recommendations and some old ones. Reverted this page back to the correct values according to the current meeting stone restrictions.

(Zamael@Frostmane 2/5/06)

Raiding lower level instances
I don't think you can raid any of those lower level instances anymore. It hasn't been like that for quite some time I think. I'm fairly certain the only things you can raid instance-wise is BRS, MC, AQ, ZG, and now Naxx.


 * According to, the limits are still 10 player for many of the instances, thus, raidable. :) -- Kirkburn 23:25, 18 July 2006 (EDT)

Instance Cascade
I noticed something that was mathmatically incorrect, the bars do not properly represent the suggested levels. For instance, UBRS is a lvl 58-60 instance. The bars suggested this covers two levels, after all, 60-58=2. However it actually covers three levels: 58, 59 and 60. Because of this, I added 10 to most of the bars' width ('10' being 1 level's width). I also attempted to fix the lvl 70 instances, however this did not correctly work because 10 is too narrow for 1 character. (also, I'm not certain how well this resolves on other browsers/resolution) It was a little confusing before, and though I believe my addition is an improvement, I don't think it is quite up to par. Fealuinix 10:18, 5 March 2007 (EST)

Update: Okay...actually, it doesn't seem to be the character width throwing things out of alignment ...it's something else. CSS n00b --> Fealuinix 10:23, 5 March 2007 (EST)

It seems LBRS has been altered such that the graphic doesn't match the text level range. Which is correct? And is that the right thing to do with UBRS? --ObiChad 13:33, 20 March 2007 (EDT)


 * I've moved them back. It was a stupid change. 13:48, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Would it not be easier to read (and more logical) to have the level range inside the boxes, like the Zones by level page? --Niightblade (talk) 06:40, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm thinking a reworking of how it looks is needed too, and a better examples description to go along with it. I'll start working on what a different format would look like.--Ewolfg1 (talk) 10:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Clean-up
I like this page for it helps you to find out n what order you should do the instances. However, a clean-up is needed as the second section contains almost the same information as the first. LarsPensjo 03:05, 1 March 2007 (EST)
 * I simply removed the rednundant section and added some sub sections to the existing material. -- LarsPensjo 08:01, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
 * I like the idea of having a section that says at what level you can enter the instance. I get asked this question a lot and never know the answer. --ObiChad 13:32, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

Regarding the Outland comment added, I know it's possible to get summoned to Outland, so do we know for a fact that all Outland instances have a level requirement of 58? Is it possibly lower? And aren't some certainly higher? Old Hillsbrad requires that intro quest to enter and that isn't attainable until 66 I think. Thoughts? --ObiChad 12:21, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Heroic difficulty
I felt that there needed to be some way to add the heroic difficulty settings to the existing dungeons. I have done so on the two first Hellfire Citadel dungeons as a way to start a discussion about how it should be done. I would very much like some feedback on the idea. Since I could find no place that actually lists suitable level ranges to the heroic mode dungeons I used common sense to rate the two dungeons that I have added so far. I can see one problem when we come to the lvl 70 range normal mode dungeons as the heroic mode dungeons levels would overlap. Any ideas on how to solve that issue? -- Karney 06:01, 9 March 2007 (EST)
 * I agree that information about the heroic instances are needed, and it is a good initiative. However, the original way the diagram was drawn, it could be used as a guide in what order to do the instances. With the current layout, it is no longer growing difficulty futher down. What I also wonder, is if there is any difference of difficulty between different heoice instances? -- LarsPensjo 07:02, 9 March 2007 (EST)
 * Considering that there is no official word on the difficulty level of the heroic dungeons, apart form the fact that they should be significantly harder, there is very little to go on concerning the level suggestions. Once people start doing more Heroic dungeons I am sure that we will get a better feel for them. As for the growing difficulty level layout, I did think about that as well. I'm not saying that this is the best solution or even a very good one. I primarily made the alteration to get the discussion going. However that being said, the heroic dungeons are a bit tricky to place. Either we consider them as the same dungeons as the ones before, like we have in the reputation diagrams, Cenarion Expedition for example, or we consider them entirely new dungeons and place them where they should be in the list. The latter option will mean a massive increase in list length, although that might be prefered since we avoid overlapping difficultyratings around lvl 70. -- Karney 07:59, 9 March 2007 (EST)
 * There is a slight difference in heroic mode dungeons, but not to warrant an indentation I think. Rather than entering 2 heroics, I'd vote for entering the instance blocks, Hellfire Citadel, Auchindoun, etc. in a heroic entry. They require the same reputation to enter, so they fit in a single entry. As far a difficulty goes, I've not seen all of them yet, maybe someone can add to the list:
 * Bulwark - medium - mostly easy, second boss hard, final boss requires tank with good fire res
 * Slave Pens - medium - hard trash pulls, easy bosses, second healer & nature resist aura recommended for boss
 * Underbog - easy - second healer recommended, kiter must, rather easy on the whole
 * Steamvault - medium - second healer must, bosses hard without a lot of damage, warlock recommended
 * Shadow Lab - easy - most trash and first 2 bosses are like normal, only the big single enemies are tough
 * Mechanar - easy first story, from what I heard harder after that medium to hard
 * Botanica - someone has to have 275+ arcane resist, or you won't see the second room
 * --Gorash 11:59, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

Keyed Instances?
Is there a symbol we could add for instances that require keys? I see pages about keys (The Master's Key) and a page listing instances that need keys (Instance attunement)... It'd be nice to tie this in here somehow.

(I'm a n00b here, by the way, sorry if this is redundant.)

Summoning Stone
Be great to see a summoning stone range. The 'you are to low/high' is always a pita. Especially for backwaters instances.


 * From Meeting Stone: "Note that the summoner and the person being summoned must both meet the suggested level range for the dungeon for the stone to be usable. The second person, who clicks on the portal to finalize the summon, can be of any level." I'd assume the level range in parenthesis is the level range you need to fall under. Kadaan 22:18, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

LFG System
With the new LFG system, one clicks on the green button and can choose from a selection of recommended instances. Even if other instances are allowable, they won't be available through this method. As I move up through new levels, the list of instances through the LFG system changes accordingly. The order in which new instances have appeared in that list (and later dropped off the list) is following some other logic than the one listed here. Does anyone understand this order? I can only say for sure it is NOT the same as the order here. Thank you.

Minimum levels
AQ at 50 and Naxx at 51 I find very hard to believe. 20:17, 8 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Fail@u - - Recommended != minimum - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by.


 * Why, thank you for your insulting response. 14:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

The page lists Kara as having a minimum level of 68, but I'm 99% sure you can't begin the quest chain to get key till you hit 70. Kadaan 22:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

If anyone reads this...it is confirmed as being 68...Blizzard changed it the quests to start at 68 due to Druid Flight Form...which means they can run Arc at 68 therefore being keyed at 68...they probably wouldn't actually raid at 68, but nonetheless druids can be keyed at 68 Acecow 18:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

For Heroic dungeons, it is possible to go into some (only been to one myself) at level 62. See as proof of it, was Underbog. Sacarasc 05:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

I would think that the level required for Heroics would be the same as their non-heroic counterparts...you'd just have to be keyed with the corresponding faction...thus the only real limitation to the heroics is TK due to the flying mounts...and of course finding a group that would run a non 70 through a heroic(which...there's really no point in that) Acecow 06:56, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Onyxia's Lair: Should the page be modified to show that Horde can't actually enter until level 55? The attunement chain can't be picked up by Horde players until that level. CorradinFarwind 15:18, 14 April 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm pretty sure when you try to zone in and don't meet the requirements, it says you have to be 55, in a raid, and carrying the key. Horde can't start the attunement quests until 58.  I'm certain that neither faction can get in 50-54. Xenophilius (talk) 20:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

2.3 Instance changes
Is there a page yet to track the new suggested level ranges for dungeons? I'm gonna add something on the bottom of this page to hopefully get the data discovery process going. Added SFK based on blue post in forum. Added RFD based on level 39 mobs moving to level 36. In WC, at least one level 21 boss is now a 20. Not sure about the final level 22 boss. --ObiChad 03:39, 15 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The Outland instance recommended levels seem to have the pattern of level of first mob encountered as the low number and level of last boss as the high number. I'm using that idea on the new 2.3 suggested levels. Oh, and I have specific boss level changes if people are interested. --ObiChad 19:33, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Mob level ranges needed: RFC - confirmed (unchanged) WC - need confirmation on Mutanus SFK - confirmed BFD - need confirmation on Aku'mai RFK - need confirmation on Charlga Gnomer - confirmed SM - all sections confirmed RFD - confirmed Ulda - need confirmation on Archaedas ZF - need confirmation on Chief Ukorz Sandscalp, Shadowpriest Sezz'ziz, and Gahz'rilla Mara - confirmed ST - need all bosses other than Hazzas and Morphaz BRD - need confirmation on Magmus, Princess, and Emperor LBRS - confirmed DM - confirmed (unchanged) Strat - confirmed (unchanged) Scholo - confirmed (unchanged)


 * VC needs to be added to this list --SeerBlade 00:40, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Stockades appears to be missing as well --Tryak 14:35, 14 Novemeber 2007 (UTC)


 * Should we just get rid of the top list, since it's now pretty pointless?Minionman 04:23, 18 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yea...if someone could do that...or give the ok for some to do that...twould be nice Acecow 18:34, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Done. I've added VC at the reported enemy range from The_Deadmines, and Stocks from Stormwind_Stockade, but I haven't verified those ranges personally.  Please let me know if I've made an error or left anything out. EDG 05:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Difficulty of Vault is debatable
I noticed that 10/25 Vault is listed as "80+" but in reality, most players find they are more likely to find difficulty in the 5 player heroics than on Vault. I'd personally mark it as "80" but leave the heroics as "80+". -Howbizr (talk) 22:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Bad Format?
I can't see the article properly example. Maybe the info should be re-design to be access for all browsers. --Killogwil (talk) 21:45, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Instance short namings and abbreviations
I never saw on my realm someone to name, for example, "Nexus Heroic" as "H-Nexus". Rather it would be "Nexus Hc" --FractalizeR (talk) 07:38, October 28, 2009 (UTC)
 * Different servers use different abbreviations. Grizzly Hills US often uses H-instance and Instance Heroic - conversely, I've only seen 'Hc' once. H is most common on our server, HTOC HDTK HUK HUP H Oc etc. It's interesting to have variety, but don't just assume your server is the law of the land. Sariko (talk) 18:40, November 21, 2009 (UTC)

Dungeon Finder range requirements
I'd suggest to add the level range required to use the dungeon finder. This range is shown in the finder but would be nice to list it here as well - possibly within {} or <> after the "recommended level range"? Just noticed this was different the other day but don't have access to characters of all levels to find what the dungeon finder shows - will add what I have soon. Is handy for lower-level characters to know when they can go to certain dungeons via the finder. Mycroft IV (talk)
 * Agreed, I'd also vote to scrap the arbitrary 'recommended level' - it's unsourced and subjective, and in most cases is probably the DF range, moved in a level or two either side. paulbrock (talk) 02:14, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

Indents, bar width and bar placement.
What is the significance of cascading indentations on this list?

Why do some of the lines have the highlighted bar before the explanation and some have it after?

Is there some significance to the width of the highlighted bar?

Murzik


 * The cascading indentations and width show the level range while the explanation before/after are to reduce the chance of a horizontal scroll bar on low resolution monitors. 19:41, February 9, 2010 (UTC)

Reasons for the split?
I think it was fine to have everything in a single page :S.--Lon-ami (talk) 12:02, 5 November 2010 (UTC)


 * No opposition to the revert?--Lon-ami (talk) 09:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Wasn't the article too long?
 * 11:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Not in my opinion :S.--Lon-ami (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * It may have a use in the upcoming Instancefooter.
 * 13:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think so, this is supposed to be a list of ALL the instances by level. Splitting it is just stupid, and the page wasn't that long.--Lon-ami (talk) 14:13, 12 November 2010 (UTC)