+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 100

Thread: The Weekly Marmot -- Cataclysm Raid French Fries

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,342
    To answer Scyla above, no Blizzard has only stated that they wished to bring the difficulty level of 10s & 25s in-line with each-other. While most people are seeing this as 10s becoming more difficult (because it would validate the larger 10m raiding population), it is possible that 25mans could be tuned down. This is purely a wait and see deal.

    Is Blizzard trying to kill 25man raiding? No, that would be extreme. However, it isn't like they haven't removed incentive from popular things in the past (see 2v2 Arenas) or outright removed raiding formats (40mans). Regardless, I believe you sugar coated your presentation by not bringing up the most problematic issues this change will bring:

    (1) Reduction of both quantity and quality of PuGing. With only one lockout, you will not have 10man raiders PuGing into 25man raids or 25man raiders PuGing into 10man raids. Without this, the only people who will be availible to PuG in any given week are the unguilded & those who missed their guild's raid. This will be a very small percent of a server population every week. Furthermore, it will exacerbate the "Reserve" role problem even more because it will be infinitely harder to PuG in a few people when Joe Shaman & John Priest are on vacation [which affects both 10s & 25s].

    (2)
    The "Reserve" role problem. As of now, most guilds have a few folks that are reserve players that either get rotated into the raid or are "casual" members that can fill a vacancy when it happens. These guild members are extremely important persons that allow for a much smoother raiding experience. In Cata, these people will be hit the hardest. Lets say my guild runs 3 nights a week. Days 1 & 2 I have perfect attendance from my "core" group, but on day 3 someone must be absent. One of my reservists who normally would've been rotated in next week can fill the spot for day3 [which only had 2 bosses left in the lockout]. In WotLK, my reservist has no problem coming in for 2 bosses because it only locks him to one raid size. At anytime during the week he can go run w/e size we do not and still get a full raid experience that week, if he chooses. In the new system, he will have seen 2 bosses that week for that raid. Period. No mas. This is not an attractive place to be and I feel many "reservists" will have to choose between friends and content, something that is never fun.

    (3) The "average" 25man guild problem. There are a whole bunch of 25man guilds out there that are full of people that enjoy the 25man experience. However, that does not necessarily mean that everyone in that guild believes the same way. A recent unscientific poll of 1,000 MMO Champion respondents suggests that upwards of 50% of those who currently run 25mans now will not do so in Cataclysm. What does this mean to the top 500 guilds? Absolutely nothing. They will continue to go about business as usual. For the top "3,000" or "5,000" it could mean a significant upheaval. What do you do as a guild leader when half of your 25man team wants to continue doing 25mans, while the other half would prefer to do 10s? This is a huge dilemma. Since 10man guilds are much easier to organize, those that will now prefer to do 10s will find a guild rather easily. However, for those that would prefer to do 25s, you are now left with half a raid... something that is very difficult to recruit for even in today's "25man dominant" environment. Your only hope is to find another guild on your server that had a similar issue and hope your personalities and raid times match, something that will become more difficult the smaller your realm.

    (4) Does faster loot really equate to a big enough incentive? What I believe you have describe above is why people will engage in the "recruit-a-friend" program, not 25man raiding in Cataclysm. I'll take from your french fry analogy to explain it as I believe it will play out.

    (a) You have purchased a punch card for french fries at your burger joint of choice. Each time a number is punched, you get a medium order of french fries. It has a total of 30 punches before you run out, you may only buy one punch card a month, and, by yourself, you can only use one punch everyday. In essence, you can get one medium order of french fries everyday for an entire month, at which time you can order another punch card.

    (b) Now, said burger joint of choice offers a special. If you bring yourself and four other friends, you can pool your collective punch cards and receive six medium orders of french fries a day. That means each day, you and your friends can enjoy 1/5 more french fries than the guy who came in solo. This sounds great until you hit day 25 and you run out of punches. You are now left waiting eagerly for 5days until next month comes around so you can purchase your next punchcard.

    (c) To wrap the analogy, 10man raiding in cataclysm provides the same loot at a lower pace, which allows for content to be relevant longer, whereas 25man raiding will grant you faster loot, but leave you without relevant content in-between raid releases. Some would argue that this is not enough of an incentive for many "average" 25man guilds, though certainty an incentive for hardcore 25man progression.



  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Amaranthine View Post
    I love how cider says "I got ppl coming up to me and saying..." I get this hilarious image of him walking out of the grocery and getting mobbed by tankspotters going "Cider! Cider! what do you think of the new warrior changes?!" "Cider! Cider! What french fries do you prefer when raiding?!" etc etc.

    Anyways another great episode, thanks for you thoughts! i personally didn't even notice the "more loot per player" and just saw "more loot" so thanks for pointing that out
    Lore is not Cider ...

    For the topic at hand; Thanks for the objective view Lore. The "sky is falling" posts are getting tiresome.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    (4) Does faster loot really equate to a big enough incentive? What I believe you have describe above is why people will engage in the "recruit-a-friend" program, not 25man raiding in Cataclysm.
    If faster loot wasn't a large enough incentive, why would folks be raiding both 10s and 25s in the first place? Most people don't raid both currently for the chance to do the same thing twice, they raid both for the extra emblems and loot it provides.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3

    french fries an the crowd

    Hey Lore,

    you forgot one thing in your french fries analogy: Yes, you get the X-large fries if you come with your 4 friends. BUT you have to stand in the much longer crowd to get them! Because (except perhaps in the very top guilds) you will never have 25 folks on the same level of playing as the 10 best out of them.
    So the 25 men will get more loot, yes, but they will get it much slower ...
    Also: If dropping the same level of gear in 10s and 25s, and IF this shall remain nearly fair, Blizz will have to tune down 25s and not tune up 10s, otherwise lots of their customers will not see more than the first boss of an instance for a long time.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,408
    Thanks for pointing out (2) here spiritus, i didn't wanna retype up all of my comments again, you did it masterfully here.

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Volador View Post
    If faster loot wasn't a large enough incentive, why would folks be raiding both 10s and 25s in the first place? Most people don't raid both currently for the chance to do the same thing twice, they raid both for the extra emblems and loot it provides.
    As I said, for your hardcore progression guilds, nothing will change. I'm talking mostly about the average 25man guild. The one that may see a decent, if not large, percentage of their membership switch to 10s leaving half of their membership holding the candle. Guilds like these ran 10s because they were only progressed 4-8/12 normal in 25man ICC, so running 10s provided far more opportunities to upgrade gear than exclusively running 25s in a Cata type system. The incentive is lost when you can only down less than 50% of the bosses in your first month of raiding, while a smaller, more intimate 10man group could have, say, 75% completion within the first month (no, not that 10mans will be easier by design, just easier to get 10people to do all the right things at the same time).

    Quote Originally Posted by Kazeyonoma View Post
    Thanks for pointing out (2) here spiritus, i didn't wanna retype up all of my comments again, you did it masterfully here.
    I'm kinda pooped out after the near 40 page marathon, I think I'll chill out a bit on this thread.



  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    As I said, for your hardcore progression guilds, nothing will change. I'm talking mostly about the average 25man guild. The one that may see a decent, if not large, percentage of their membership switch to 10s leaving half of their membership holding the candle. Guilds like these ran 10s because they were only progressed 4-8/12 normal in 25man ICC, so running 10s provided far more opportunities to upgrade gear than exclusively running 25s in a Cata type system. The incentive is lost when you can only down less than 50% of the bosses in your first month of raiding, while a smaller, more intimate 10man group could have, say, 75% completion within the first month (no, not that 10mans will be easier by design, just easier to get 10people to do all the right things at the same time).
    Ok, but you're making the assumptions that Blizzard will NOT keep to their post of equalizing the difficulty of their raids. If you're doing average in 25s and you break down (unevenly, blech) into 10s, you should do average across those 10s as well. Or are you somehow going to leave your failures behind when moving to 10 man content? I don't think that someone who fails at 25s is going to do any better at 10s. If you have 20% of a raid that can't move out of the fire in 25s, odds say those same 20% won't be able to move out of the fire in 10s either.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus
    (no, not that 10mans will be easier by design, just easier to get 10people to do all the right things at the same time).
    That is what he's referring to.

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    (1) Reduction of both quantity and quality of PuGing. With only one lockout, you will not have 10man raiders PuGing into 25man raids or 25man raiders PuGing into 10man raids. Without this, the only people who will be availible to PuG in any given week are the unguilded & those who missed their guild's raid. This will be a very small percent of a server population every week. Furthermore, it will exacerbate the "Reserve" role problem even more because it will be infinitely harder to PuG in a few people when Joe Shaman & John Priest are on vacation [which affects both 10s & 25s].
    I would argue that the quantity may go down but the quality may go up. Right now players from good guilds don't pug 10 man, they run it with other guildies. If a guild has 5 reserves who want to pug 10 man at the end of the lockout because they didn't get called on for 25 man, now they have to go outside the guild and truly pug it, infusing those pugs with better quality players.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    (2) The "Reserve" role problem. As of now, most guilds have a few folks that are reserve players that either get rotated into the raid or are "casual" members that can fill a vacancy when it happens. These guild members are extremely important persons that allow for a much smoother raiding experience. In Cata, these people will be hit the hardest. Lets say my guild runs 3 nights a week. Days 1 & 2 I have perfect attendance from my "core" group, but on day 3 someone must be absent. One of my reservists who normally would've been rotated in next week can fill the spot for day3 [which only had 2 bosses left in the lockout]. In WotLK, my reservist has no problem coming in for 2 bosses because it only locks him to one raid size. At anytime during the week he can go run w/e size we do not and still get a full raid experience that week, if he chooses. In the new system, he will have seen 2 bosses that week for that raid. Period. No mas. This is not an attractive place to be and I feel many "reservists" will have to choose between friends and content, something that is never fun.
    After doing a lot of thinking about this argument and agreeing with it at first, I have changed my mind. As the system stand right now, 10 man strict guilds already have all those restrictions forced upon them. Their reserves can't run 25 man as an alternative or the guild loses the 'strict' designation, so they are forced to deal with the EXACT scenario you are describing. However, 10 man strict guilds do exist and make it work. Shared lockouts put all guilds be they 10 or 25 man in the same situation and all reserves in the same situation. To me that is not a bad thing. The rest of the changes can't work without a shared lockout, so this is a sacrifice all players have to make that will just hit those who play more harder.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    (3) The "average" 25man guild problem. There are a whole bunch of 25man guilds out there that are full of people that enjoy the 25man experience. However, that does not necessarily mean that everyone in that guild believes the same way. A recent unscientific poll of 1,000 MMO Champion respondents suggests that upwards of 50% of those who currently run 25mans now will not do so in Cataclysm. What does this mean to the top 500 guilds? Absolutely nothing. They will continue to go about business as usual. For the top "3,000" or "5,000" it could mean a significant upheaval. What do you do as a guild leader when half of your 25man team wants to continue doing 25mans, while the other half would prefer to do 10s? This is a huge dilemma. Since 10man guilds are much easier to organize, those that will now prefer to do 10s will find a guild rather easily. However, for those that would prefer to do 25s, you are now left with half a raid... something that is very difficult to recruit for even in today's "25man dominant" environment. Your only hope is to find another guild on your server that had a similar issue and hope your personalities and raid times match, something that will become more difficult the smaller your realm.
    To me this is an argument for the change not against. If 1/2 the people raiding 25 man would rather be raiding 10 man given equality of loot, then how is a change allowing them to do so a bad thing. Lore touched on this in the video.

    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    (4) Does faster loot really equate to a big enough incentive? What I believe you have describe above is why people will engage in the "recruit-a-friend" program, not 25man raiding in Cataclysm. I'll take from your french fry analogy to explain it as I believe it will play out.
    Again, if people need more incentive to run 25 man than this and the enjoyment of a larger raid group, why should Blizzard have unbalanced loot which makes people feel like they need to be doing something they would rather not be doing?

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Scyla View Post
    Well in my opinion Naxx10 was, with the exclusion of Sapphiron, less difficult then Naxx25 even with a group which had only itemlevel 200 gear (again, done that with a twink on a random run).
    Especially Thaddius and Kel'thuzad.
    I have to disagree. Did you ever try Heiggan with a healer who couldn't dance on 10? Solo healing that fight wasn't the most fun thing in the world, and god help you if the one that COULD dance didn't have a way to cure diseases.

    Grand Widow Faerlina was interesting at first too. Kept running into the same retarded issues of people who would immediately run to slaughter the adds, and coordinating the kills so that the adds popped at just the right time wasn't always easy. Remember...at the time she could 3 hit a tank when she frenzied, and pre-nax tanks were lucky to have 24k health starting out.

    Maexxna was also a lot of fun on 10 compared to 25. One bad dpser and you were looking at 2 wraps after the 30%. 25's didn't usually have that problem IIRC.

    The Four Horsemen was fun when you didn't have naxx gear. One screwup in the back and you wiped. And it's not like you could err on the side of caution until you had the hang of it either because all three healers were spoken for. God help you if you were used to 2 healing everything and forgot the 3rd healer entirely. Pray that you had a druid for the front (I healed the front in a 2-heal "blow up thane" setup as a disc priest more than once. It was an "interesting" tactic without 213 gear).

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Kazeyonoma View Post
    That is what he's referring to.
    If Blizzard succeeds in making the encounters equal for 10s/25s (I'm not sure they can), then it's player failure for standing in fires. If a 25 man raid has five people that stand in fires, then breaking them down will put two in each 10 man. If that causes a failure in the 25s, it will cause the same failure in 10s.

    I can break any 25 man down into an elite 10 and a failure 10, but if you break them down evenly they shouldn't succeed any more than the 25.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Volador View Post
    Ok, but you're making the assumptions that Blizzard will NOT keep to their post of equalizing the difficulty of their raids. If you're doing average in 25s and you break down (unevenly, blech) into 10s, you should do average across those 10s as well. Or are you somehow going to leave your failures behind when moving to 10 man content? I don't think that someone who fails at 25s is going to do any better at 10s. If you have 20% of a raid that can't move out of the fire in 25s, odds say those same 20% won't be able to move out of the fire in 10s either.
    Looking at parses from many, many different types of guilds, what I usually find as the problem for some guilds isn't necessarily "standing in the fire" but having the ability to focus more directly at the task you are given when there is a lot going on around you. It will just be a cold hard fact that there will always be less happening on your screen in a 10man than a 25man. Does that make the actual task itself any harder mathematically? No, but if you are not able to filter out what 24 other people are doing as easy as you can 9, it becomes a more difficult task. On the parse, this will usually be shown by raider X actually having less DPS in 25s than in 10s, something which really shouldn't happen normally [For healers you can look at activity & for tanks you really have to dig deep to see the metrics].

    So, in essence, I think Blizzard will have an extremely difficult time equalizing the difficulty of 10s & 25s for more than just the above factor. CAN they pull it off? Possibly. They do have the best designers in the business. Its just that every time I try to think of a way to balance the two equally, one comes out ahead as noticeably more difficult. The only way I can see it working is if they lower the difficulty of 25s and stick to very, very simple encounter mechanics, which would not exactly be exciting news (nor do I think that is what they will do).



  13. #33
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    471
    I really don't see why most hard core raiders would even consider 25 mans unless they came with titles or a few rare items than 10 man. A 10 man group that is successful will net more gear over time than a 25 man group that struggles week to week. I would take a medium fry every week for 6 months instead of a large fry every three weeks.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    Looking at parses from many, many different types of guilds, what I usually find as the problem for some guilds isn't necessarily "standing in the fire" but having the ability to focus more directly at the task you are given when there is a lot going on around you. It will just be a cold hard fact that there will always be less happening on your screen in a 10man than a 25man. Does that make the actual task itself any harder mathematically? No, but if you are not able to filter out what 24 other people are doing as easy as you can 9, it becomes a more difficult task. On the parse, this will usually be shown by raider X actually having less DPS in 25s than in 10s, something which really shouldn't happen normally [For healers you can look at activity & for tanks you really have to dig deep to see the metrics].

    So, in essence, I think Blizzard will have an extremely difficult time equalizing the difficulty of 10s & 25s for more than just the above factor. CAN they pull it off? Possibly. They do have the best designers in the business. Its just that every time I try to think of a way to balance the two equally, one comes out ahead as noticeably more difficult. The only way I can see it working is if they lower the difficulty of 25s and stick to very, very simple encounter mechanics, which would not exactly be exciting news (nor do I think that is what they will do).
    I think we can agree that Blizzard can not pull it off, or will have a very difficult time doing it. My point is, if you take them at their word the encounter mechanics should be identical in difficulty. IF they succeed, then a 25 man raid breaking down into 10 man raids should exceed in one any more than the other.

    I will be doing 10s not because of the changes it will make to encounter mechanics, but rather because I only have to deal with 9 other people's possible mistakes vs 24.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,342
    Again, Mwawka, the points you bring up are only from a 10man perspective arguing against a 25man perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mwawka View Post
    I would argue that the quantity may go down but the quality may go up. Right now players from good guilds don't pug 10 man, they run it with other guildies. If a guild has 5 reserves who want to pug 10 man at the end of the lockout because they didn't get called on for 25 man, now they have to go outside the guild and truly pug it, infusing those pugs with better quality players.
    There are many well progressed 25man guilds that do not run 10s as a guild. You completely ignored all the 10man raiders who PuG 25s.


    Quote Originally Posted by Mwawka View Post
    After doing a lot of thinking about this argument and agreeing with it at first, I have changed my mind. As the system stand right now, 10 man strict guilds already have all those restrictions forced upon them. Their reserves can't run 25 man as an alternative or the guild loses the 'strict' designation, so they are forced to deal with the EXACT scenario you are describing. However, 10 man strict guilds do exist and make it work. Shared lockouts put all guilds be they 10 or 25 man in the same situation and all reserves in the same situation. To me that is not a bad thing. The rest of the changes can't work without a shared lockout, so this is a sacrifice all players have to make that will just hit those who play more harder.
    I never mentioned anywhere that this is just a problem for 25man guilds. Its a problem for everyone. Again, look at the entire picture instead of just your own perspective. I see that the equal sharing of misery is OK with you. 25s vs. 10s =/= bourgeoisie vs. proletariat.



    Quote Originally Posted by Mwawka View Post
    To me this is an argument for the change not against. If 1/2 the people raiding 25 man would rather be raiding 10 man given equality of loot, then how is a change allowing them to do so a bad thing. Lore touched on this in the video.
    This is a great argument for the individual who chooses to raid 10mans. It is a horrible argument for an organization that he or she left that wishes to run 25s. On many servers, there are only a few guilds that have the organizational structure and leadership to successfully run a 25man raid. If half of those individuals leave these guilds, what happens to the other 50% when they have conlficts with the rest of the 25man raiders on the server over personality and schedule? Again, there are people who enjoy running 25mans for the experience who will be indirectly affected by the individual choices of some people choosing 10s or 25s. But hey, they don't really come across your path so they do not matter, right?


    Quote Originally Posted by Mwawka View Post
    Again, if people need more incentive to run 25 man than this and the enjoyment of a larger raid group, why should Blizzard have unbalanced loot which makes people feel like they need to be doing something they would rather not be doing?
    I'm merely presenting a possible outcome of these changes. Again, there will be folks who enjoy 25man raiding that will have large portions of their guild leave for the 10man experience, who will no longer have 25people to raid with, and left with a monster of a recruiting headache.
    Last edited by Spiritus; 05-03-2010 at 12:13 PM.



  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    786
    If this change goes though it would be far less of a strain to just run 10 mans. I mean my 10 man group was stacked taking down server first hard modes and all that, simply because we had most of the best raiders our guild had to offer, none of the downies. And while I do enjoy 10 mans.....thats not what real raiding is to me.....

    Raiding is coordinatiing a larger group of people around a giant boss until he finally drops, finding a strategy that yours for your guild. Moar lewt is a lousy incentive for dealing with the realities of 25 mans, your dealing with morons, attendance issues, etc, but in the end its all worth it since it's harder to coordinate and the loot is better.

    I dont get it really. You check the Raid Forums and everyone will say that Ulduar was a nearly perfect formula, yet Blizzard keeps throwing these stupid experiments at us ruining everything.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Volador View Post
    I think we can agree that Blizzard can not pull it off, or will have a very difficult time doing it. My point is, if you take them at their word the encounter mechanics should be identical in difficulty. IF they succeed, then a 25 man raid breaking down into 10 man raids should exceed in one any more than the other.

    I will be doing 10s not because of the changes it will make to encounter mechanics, but rather because I only have to deal with 9 other people's possible mistakes vs 24.
    No. We absolutely cannot agree that it's not possible to pull off because you're looking at it strictly from a 25-man perspective where the only experience you've had for the last year in 10's was with a gear advantage.

    10-man raids have an innate advantage coordinating. All that means is that to pump up the difficulty they have to tune in different places. 10's are a different beast than 25's. You can't think about them the same way from a design perspective and expect them to act the same way.

    In 25's the crux of the issue is properly coordinating with the other people in your raid. Stand in the wrong spot and you kill your buddy, or you run the healer out of mana (unless they decide to just let you die for being an idiot). DPS the wrong thing and you're wasting time at best. At worst you blow up the raid somehow.

    In 10's the crux is more personal performance and resource management. IMO you'll see healers going OOM to be a much larger problem in 10's if your healer isn't good at triage or overheals too much.

    Additionally, the difference in 10's and 25's will be more along the lines of for, say something like smokebomb, the difference between using it properly (10's) and getting everyone else to use it properly (25's).

    I can see things like tighter enrage timers in hard mode 10's than in 25's with similar gear because in 10's it's more about what you can do and less about what you can not do to your buddy by standing in the wrong spot at the wrong time.

    They're going to need to spend more time working on the differences between 10's an 25's. IMO, the first two raiding tiers in Cata are going to be kinda rough.

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    803
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollin View Post
    No. We absolutely cannot agree that it's not possible to pull off because you're looking at it strictly from a 25-man perspective where the only experience you've had for the last year in 10's was with a gear advantage.
    I'm looking at it from a 25s perspective, and I've had a gear advantage there? Did you quote the wrong person, or are you just making a (false) assumption? I was also responding to a very specific post made by one person (whom I agreed with on the point of the challenge to balance).

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    197
    @ Spiritus

    First of all, my points have very little to do with a 10 or 25 man perspective. You actually don't know what I do with my game time and what type of guild I am in, so you are assuming I am arguing from a first person point of view, but in reality many of my points are derived from a more open minded view of things. They are my perspective, but I am not looking at them with 10 man bias as you seem to think.

    Point #1: No 10 or 25 man bias here. Just offering an alternate view of how things 'may' turn out. Notice the use of the word 'may'. I do not assume how pugging will take shape in Cataclysm, because I do not know and neither do you. I'm offering a plausible alternative, which is something you don't seem to want to acknowledge. In your description of raiding in Cataclysm you use the definitive 'will' often. You however do not actually have any proof that things 'will' occur that way. That is my point, you argue that, definitively, pugging is going to go to hell. I argue that it may be just fine.

    Point #2: I didn't argue that you said it was just a problem for 25 man guilds. I argued that a system where it is a problem for one sector of the population due to game design is not a fair one. I am not in a strict 10 man guild, so this is not an issue for me, so don't make the assumption that I am arguing with personal bias because you don't know how I play the game. My point is that in order to remove the problem for one raiding path they needed to make the changes they did and that I don't believe finding reserves will be as big an issue as you do because EVERY guild in the game, 10 or 25 man will have the same issue to deal with. There will be no greener grass on the other side, because jumping to another guild won't mean you aren't facing the problem still. As for your Bourgeoisie vs. Proletariate comment, I made no such allusions anywhere in my argument, so please don't assign those types of comments to me.

    EDIT: As I think about this argument, I realize that it will actually be more detrimental to a 10 man guild than a 25 man guild. A 10 man guild requires more reserves per raid slot than a 25 man. Essentially with 10 raid spots available, a 10 man guild needs 4-5 reserves to make sure every spot is covered where a 25 man group can get by with less as a % of raid size. Due to this and the increased chance of someone missing in a larger group, a 25 man reserve is more likely to get called on in a given lockout. The argument that this change will mean the end of 25 man raiding just doesn't hold water. The change will affect everyone good or bad and if anything is worse for those who choose a 10 man path.

    Points #3 & 4: Basically these are similar points. Again, explain to me why Blizzard should create an environment where people feel coerced to stay in a 25 man situation when they'd rather be in a 10 man one. How can the need of the guild leader to have their life easier be more important than the enjoyment of the individual player? I'm not arguing that there won't be lots of guild jumping and restructuring in Cataclysm, I'm arguing that in the big picture the benefits of the changes outweigh this.
    Last edited by Mwawka; 05-03-2010 at 01:08 PM.

  20. #40
    Honestly, i don't unstand what all the huff and puff is about?!?!

    As it stands now, people run the same stupid content twice everyweek because ... hell you want more gear via badges/drops. That to me doesn't sound fun at all. Spending hours and hours running the "hardcore" crap only to come back tomorrow and spend hours on that same "easy" crap only for some extra badges?

    What are people so upset about?? Now you only have to do your run once a week and you get more for nothing almost!! No more spending those extra hours on that "lesser" content everyweek. Exactly how much more or less stuff compaired to now?? ... no one really knows as numbers havn't been released. I mean come on ... i highly doubt at the end of the fight your going to be thrown 1 extra piece of loot and a copper for the "trouble" of 15 extra ppl.

    As for nobody running 25 mans anymore. well ... do you want extra loot?? Do you want extra gold?? Do you want extra "stuff"?? Then don't run 10 mans.

    Personally, nothing is changing in my mind. Come next expansion people will get more bang for there buck*buck as in time*. 25 mans give you more without the extra run of the same content. 10 mans give you more and now your not the "second" rate group because the difficulty are exactly the same *give or take*.

    People should be happy, Blizz is giving more for less. Which frees up time to do other things ... i just don't get why ppl are upset??

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts