[Roana]

Source: Arrivan As for difficulty, Zul'Aman is a great example of what they can do in 10 man raids, even if most of the fights have similar themes (don't stand in the fire, don't stand in the storm, heal the tank as they get hit very hard, don't stand in the damn fire; however this is true for much of the Burning Crusade's raid content).

I think that this is at least currently inescapable. The class mechanics of WoW simply do not allow for a whole lot of complexity, so you have to look outside of those to make raid encounters non-trivial, and there you don't have a lot of options.

The #1 thing that you can always use to increase complexity is positioning, because that is largely separate from what classes do; as a result, the majority of raid encounters in the Burning Crusade have a feel not very much unlike a formal dance, where being in the right place at the right time and doing the right thing in response to your dance partner's -- or in the case of WoW, raid boss's -- move (this differs from a game such as chess in that the response to a move has generally been analyzed beforehand and is known). Look at how warlocks are moving in some of the kill videos for the Eredar Twins and you'll see what I mean (and that's just the most visible of several similar aspects for the same raid fight). Aran and Netherspite are earlier examples of the same principle, and you can find aspects of it in almost any raid fight (except those that are pure gear checks).

[Arrivan]

Source: Roana I think that this is at least currently inescapable. The class mechanics of WoW simply do not allow for a whole lot of complexity, so you have to look outside of those to make raid encounters non-trivial, and there you don't have a lot of options. The #1 thing that you can always use to increase complexity is positioning, because that is largely separate from what classes do; as a result, the majority of raid encounters in the Burning Crusade have a feel not very much unlike a formal dance, where being in the right place at the right time and doing the right thing in response to your dance partner's -- or in the case of WoW, raid boss's -- move (this differs from a game such as chess in that the response to a move has generally been analyzed beforehand and is known). Look at how warlocks are moving in some of the kill videos for the Eredar Twins and you'll see what I mean (and that's just the most visible of several similar aspects for the same raid fight). Aran and Netherspite are earlier examples of the same principle, and you can find aspects of it in almost any raid fight (except those that are pure gear checks).

I agree with you, which is why I was very happy to read about the new kinds of mechanics that may be introduced in WotLK. Quoting from the World of Raids preview:

This is also where you'll find The Nexus, a new instance with level 70, level 80 and raid wings. This airborne spiral of ice, crackling with lightning, is home to the evil Blue Dragonflight, and one of its wings will use the vehicle combat system to allow whole parties of players to fly drakes through it, bombarding the enemy.

It's new mechanics (and hopefully not just gimmicks) that could breathe new life into raid strategy. I guess we'll have to wait and see what they pull out.

[Kerchunk]

How is having a lower chance of success not a direct reflection of how challenging something is, given that increased player coordination allows you to increase the chance of success? You clearly say that there is additional challenge from organizing the larger raid at the end of the same paragraph.

I don’t want to get into an argument over semantics, but I did not say that organizing a raiding guild was more “challenging” exactly – only that it requires more time, dedication and effort. There’s a difference between something that is “hard” and something that’s “challenging.” Being a garbage man is hard, for example. Takes a lot of work and long hours. Is it really “challenging” though? I should think not. Take one person who has 12 hours to devote to the game every week and compare them to someone with 45 hours to devote to the game every week. It’s easy to guess which would be the more successful raider or the one more capable of running a successful guild, but does that tell you who is the “better” or more skillful player? No. Both could be of equal skill and competency, or to be sure the person with 12 hours might be even be better than the person with 45. I don’t run a guild at the moment, but if I had those 30+ hours a week to devote to the game, I would. Find the right server, recruit, attempt, boot, re-recruit, re-attempt, etc. until bosses fall. It’s an exercise in Human Resources effectively. It doesn’t mean I’m better at the game, only that I’m able to devote the time necessary to organize competent people with similar schedules. I’m not arguing that people who put forth this extra effort ought not to be rewarded for their efforts. They should be, are, and will always be with better gear and faster upgrades. My point is only to break down this fallacy that those who participate in 25-man content are inherently “better players” than those who choose not to or are unable to – and if you honestly think that’s not the opinion of a majority of 25-man raiders we’re going to have to agree to (very strongly) disagree on that point because all of my experience tells me otherwise.

The entire post and tone reaches in then falls face first into the "if you don't know what you're talking about, don't post" pool. You are fully capable of defending your own position without letting everyone know your misperceptions about raiders.

Okay, apart from the fact that I’ve spent most of my time in the game as a raider. Only recently have events in my life caused me to change my playstyle and take me out of the raiding game. I think I’ve got a pretty good perspective on both sides of the argument, and don’t see what misperceptions you’re referring to. Do you really think the average “hardcore raider” does not consider themselves superior to the average “casual?” I think a brief perusal of any of the countless forums devoted to this game will provide ample evidence to the contrary.

[Ciderhelm]

Source: Kerchunk ...and if you honestly think that’s not the opinion of a majority of 25-man raiders we’re going to have to agree to (very strongly) disagree on that point because all of my experience tells me otherwise. ... Do you really think the average “hardcore raider” does not consider themselves superior to the average “casual?” I think a brief perusal of any of the countless forums devoted to this game will provide ample evidence to the contrary.

Yes, I do. The average raider does not see themselves as superior to people they don't raid with. The average raider does not even think about players they don't raid with.

You're posting this on a website where the vast majority of guides and articles written are by serious raiders volunteering their time to help other players. In this setting, it looks pretty stupid when people go off about how awful raiders are.

[Arrivan]

Source: Kerchunk I don’t want to get into an argument over semantics, but I did not say that organizing a raiding guild was more “challenging” exactly – only that it requires more time, dedication and effort. There’s a difference between something that is “hard” and something that’s “challenging.” Being a garbage man is hard, for example. Takes a lot of work and long hours. Is it really “challenging” though? I should think not. Take one person who has 12 hours to devote to the game every week and compare them to someone with 45 hours to devote to the game every week. It’s easy to guess which would be the more successful raider or the one more capable of running a successful guild, but does that tell you who is the “better” or more skillful player? No. Both could be of equal skill and competency, or to be sure the person with 12 hours might be even be better than the person with 45. I don’t run a guild at the moment, but if I had those 30+ hours a week to devote to the game, I would. Find the right server, recruit, attempt, boot, re-recruit, re-attempt, etc. until bosses fall. It’s an exercise in Human Resources effectively. It doesn’t mean I’m better at the game, only that I’m able to devote the time necessary to organize competent people with similar schedules. I’m not arguing that people who put forth this extra effort ought not to be rewarded for their efforts. They should be, are, and will always be with better gear and faster upgrades. My point is only to break down this fallacy that those who participate in 25-man content are inherently “better players” than those who choose not to or are unable to – and if you honestly think that’s not the opinion of a majority of 25-man raiders we’re going to have to agree to (very strongly) disagree on that point because all of my experience tells me otherwise. Okay, apart from the fact that I’ve spent most of my time in the game as a raider. Only recently have events in my life caused me to change my playstyle and take me out of the raiding game. I think I’ve got a pretty good perspective on both sides of the argument, and don’t see what misperceptions you’re referring to. Do you really think the average “hardcore raider” does not consider themselves superior to the average “casual?” I think a brief perusal of any of the countless forums devoted to this game will provide ample evidence to the contrary.

I don't believe many people around here actually believe the bile that the WoW forums spew out about so called "casuals" and "raiders" (I hate these titles by the way, they are used in a "goodies versus baddies" fashion, which is just not how things are in Blizzard's and my eyes). Good and bad players exist at all levels of progression, regardless of play schedule, gear, progression, class or any other variable you wish to consider.

To put this argument to bed, I'll finish with this:

• Not all non-raiders or exclusive 10 man raiders are scrubs
• Not all 25 man raiders are no-life basement dwellers
• Good and bad players exist at ALL levels of progression
• Good players will progress and get gear faster than bad players
• People WILL complain about content, regardless of how easy or hard it is

[Kahmal]

Too many 10 mans can give a serious blow to 25 man raid guilds kinda like Arena, its just an easier route. Why trust 24 people when you can trust 9?

It seems really hard to scale 10 man difficulty, I find ZA too damn easy and no I'm not in a Tier 6 guild. Bear Boss is a joke, Eagle trash takes getting used to, boss is easy, Lynx easier then Bear maybe. Dragonhawk, our guild was stuck on him for the simple fact that ZA wasn't a priority and the few times we went in there it would be a different group to get the learning curve down. I was suprised to see how easy Hexlord and Zul'jin were.

Basically those fights are so damn simple in concept. Much of the SSC/TK ones are also but your still counting on 24 people not to be stupid. The larger size also allows the developers to be more creative.

I'm also hoping that the 10 man version wont just be a retuned version. 10 manning Arthas? Hopefully if your doing Icecrown Glacier your basically working as a special task force for the main assault group (25 man raid) to unlock doors and such while taking down Artha's top lietenants.

[Kerchunk]

Source: Ciderhelm You're posting this on a website where the vast majority of guides and articles written are by serious raiders volunteering their time to help other players. In this setting, it looks pretty stupid when people go off about how awful raiders are.

I guess that's the divergence - I'm not fully confident the type of person who contributes to this site represents the "average" raider in WoW. I would say they're a shining minority. Maybe I'm wrong. I certainly haven't sampled much outside my own server, so perhaps you're right - maybe I'm just biased because I've listened to a vocal minority of elitist jerks (no relation) who think having the time to raid makes them superior to those who don't. Again, I'm not decrying the raider nor the raiding lifestyle. I'm one myself, or was until I had a kid and switched jobs, moved across the country, etc. thus forcing me out of the raid rotation. My gripe is specifically with those who fancy themselves more skilled at the game -- and the logical extension of that, those who believe that raiding 25-man content entitles them to special dispensation - that somehow it's an "insult" to them that their precious raids will now be available to those who run 10-man content. You can't argue that these people don't exist. There's plenty of outrage being slung around from the raiding community over these changes, and the only justifiable stance you can take in being upset about this change is that you somehow feel that 10-man raiders don't "deserve" to see the content to which I ask the question my argument implies - if they're just as good at the game as you, why not let them experience the content? If you have the time and enjoy the 25-man game, go right ahead, but unless you're one of the ones who think that makes you a superior player you ought not to care that the same content is being run by 10-man groups.

[Arrivan]

Source: Kerchunk I guess that's the divergence - I'm not fully confident the type of person who contributes to this site represents the "average" raider in WoW. I would say they're a shining minority. Maybe I'm wrong. I certainly haven't sampled much outside my own server, so perhaps you're right - maybe I'm just biased because I've listened to a vocal minority of elitist jerks (no relation) who think having the time to raid makes them superior to those who don't. Again, I'm not decrying the raider nor the raiding lifestyle. I'm one myself, or was until I had a kid and switched jobs, moved across the country, etc. thus forcing me out of the raid rotation. My gripe is specifically with those who fancy themselves more skilled at the game -- and the logical extension of that, those who believe that raiding 25-man content entitles them to special dispensation - that somehow it's an "insult" to them that their precious raids will now be available to those who run 10-man content. You can't argue that these people don't exist. There's plenty of outrage being slung around from the raiding community over these changes, and the only justifiable stance you can take in being upset about this change is that you somehow feel that 10-man raiders don't "deserve" to see the content to which I ask the question my argument implies - if they're just as good at the game as you, why not let them experience the content? If you have the time and enjoy the 25-man game, go right ahead, but unless you're one of the ones who think that makes you a superior player you ought not to care that the same content is being run by 10-man groups.

What does it matter if people like you describe exist? These are the same people who QQed about the transition from 40 to 25 man raiding (and again when ZA was released) and their complaining didn't make the slightest difference. The same thing is happening now and again it won't make a bit of difference. These are the opinions that do not belong here. Keep in mind also that the elitist pricks on the WoW forums do not represent the majority of raiders either. This change is by and large excellent, and anyone who doesn't or won't see that can either not participate in the content or quit. They won't be missed.

[Rampart]

I would have a feeling that the majority of raiders are college students, just solely based on age. Now, no offense to any hardcore 7-day-a-week raiders, but if you're a college student, like I am, then are a dozen better ways to spend 5 hours on a Friday night than sitting in front of your computer screen. I really enjoy the change in the size of the raids, as it allows me to go to raids when I pretty much feel like it, as there are always people to swap in. To get to the point, the raiding schedule doesn't dictate the rest of my life. It's quite the opposite now in fact.

[Sparkarn]

Being able to select either 25 man or 10 man raiding is indeed one of blizzards best changes to the game. This will allow people to raid with their rl friends, for example on my server, Magtheridon EU, we are 10 people living in the same city, going to the same school and we play together every day. This new system will allow us to create a guild consisting only of us 10 friends and some stand ins, this change will bring smaller guilds which will result in tighter communities. Great change, allover.

[minrog]

I'm not too happy with the direction they are taking with their game. On one level I'm somewhat disappointed they kept up with their ProgressQuest/Everquest clone treadmill approach on the Xpacs. With the amount of money and talent Blizzard has I was hoping they'd do something more with it.

The other level (the in game aspects) I'm disappointed with the class dynamics they are introducing on the raiding level. I don't care for Kara or ZA because they force class stacking initially; not a lot of place for things like Moonkins or Ret paladins as an example. A 20 man raid such as ZG allowed you to bring hybrid specs and not gimp your progression speed.

I also don't like the 25 man raiding size because you end up excluding folks if you build 3 of the 10 man raids or you end up having to pug people if you run 2 of the 10 man raids. I don't miss the 40 man sizes much because the trash got really old after a while. 40 man raiding guilds had a pretty hefty numbers requirement and I would rather be in a smaller tight knit group when I play. I would probably be happier if all the group sizes were evenly divisible by the smaller groups (5/10/20).

[bosephus]

Source: minrog The other level (the in game aspects) I'm disappointed with the class dynamics they are introducing on the raiding level. I don't care for Kara or ZA because they force class stacking initially; not a lot of place for things like Moonkins or Ret paladins as an example. A 20 man raid such as ZG allowed you to bring hybrid specs and not gimp your progression speed.

I'm not sure I agree with this. My guild has completed ZA bear runs and we've always had a ret paladin in the group with us. We're T4/T5 geared (only recently started Hyjal), so it's not as if we over gear the place. Variety is the spice of life. The new format of 10 and 25 man raids will help give people more options to enjoy playing the game. More people enjoying the game = more subscribers = more money. There's no need to cater to a subset of people to keep Blizzard in the black.

[Megatrohn]

I'm very excited about the 10-men raids in WotLK as well. However, I'm worried about how challenging Blizzard can make them in comparison to 25-men raids. There is no question that 25-men raids will be more complex because it is a given that the more people there are, the more complicated things can be, but I'm wondering if the 10-man raids can emphasise personal accountability and good play as much as the hardest 25-men raids can.

It will certainly be a challenge for Blizzard to balance 10-men raids because of the extremely large variation in raid compositions possible, whereas you can expect at least a few Paladins and a few Shamans in a 25-men raid, allowing for full buffs and Heroism etc.

I believe that ZA was well-designed on Blizzard's part, and certainly a good challenge to clear in appropriate gear level (that is, Kara and badge gear). What is discouraging for a lot of people is that when they ask appropriate questions about ZA in the official forums, they get ROFL-stomped by Illidan farming people who massively outgear the instance saying Hexlord is as easy as (insert any heroic boss here) 'as long as your not a bad player' (sic).

[Ksala]

Source: Megatrohn It will certainly be a challenge for Blizzard to balance 10-men raids because of the extremely large variation in raid compositions possible, whereas you can expect at least a few Paladins and a few Shamans in a 25-men raid, allowing for full buffs and Heroism etc.

That's probably one of the key things for me. My guilds always been limited to 10 mans and you do notice the lack buffs and debuffs you'd take as a given in 25 man raiding. I always feel a bit sorry for our rogues, they're good players but they get no sunders or battle shouts (no raiding warriors) and no windfury totem as generally there's only 1 rogue so GoA gets dropped instead. That's got to be a significant chunk of their DPS lost just because of the lack of certain classes.

Balancing that so that classes work in 10 and 25 mans without being over or underpowered in either is probably a little tricky!

[nips]

Id just like to add a comment on the epic feel topic. I do aggre that 25mans have the potential to have a more epic feel to it compared to 10 mans but...
Personaly i think people are what makes an epic feeling or not. My most epic feelings in this game was tanking my first heroic and tanking netherspite, and it was mostly because of the people i was with at those times. I was a major nub when i joined their guild but they helped me all the way and it was a great group with alot of laughs, making every boss we downed more epic then my current 25 man raiding guild.

Downing bosses with people you click with are more important than the content imo, and if you have a great group to do 10 mans with its going to be more epic then 25mans with a okish guild.
Its a mmo so accomplishing stuff with others are what makes the game good, some people are more comfortable in 10 mans and some in 25mans, so i think this also affect how epic stuff feels.
That said most raiders on my realm do both 25mans and 10mans and iv never heard anyone complaning that either was boring, making me think people will have their hands full with all the new content rather then whining about what is most fun.

[Marrick]

Source: Megatrohn It will certainly be a challenge for Blizzard to balance 10-men raids because of the extremely large variation in raid compositions possible, whereas you can expect at least a few Paladins and a few Shamans in a 25-men raid, allowing for full buffs and Heroism etc.

From what I'd heard (and I don't have a solid source, just hearsay) totems are going to be raid buffs now not just party buffs. While not having 3 Pally buffs is definitely noticeable, if what I heard is true it looks like they're trying to address that concern and there's likely to be other changes to that effect as well.

[Krashtork]

I am in favor of 12.5 mans.

[Spazlord]

I'm very pleased with the proposed WotLK 10-man raids. I'm in a small guild with next to no chance of seeing anything beyond Kara and ZA, purely because we don't have the numbers, even for a core group that we could fill out with PUGgers, so the opportunity to actually see some content in the xpac is very exciting!

[Krashtork]

I'm really starting to get sick of "Gives us small guilds a chance!" People having loyalties to small guilds are a big reason that it's hard to get 25 man guilds going! Most existing small guilds don't wanna do the work it takes to get "big" because that may require "effort" /gasp

I'm sick of this bullshit catering to the people who don't wanna put in the effort of making a good guild.

People act like being in a small guild means never seeing 25 man content. FFS people, run with other small guilds! Oh wait, that may mean you have to deal with "outsiders"

/rantover

[Worldie]

As long as 10 men versions require finishing the 25 men version i'm happy with it :P