+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 100

Thread: The Weekly Marmot -- Cataclysm Raid French Fries

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    197
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    I have a very Aristotelian view of argument; that is rhetoric uncovers the truth. The more people present their positions clearly, the better off the community will be as a whole. Conflict is a necessary byproduct to these ends.
    On that we agree. One of the issues with a discussion of views in an impersonal environment like this is that you do not know if people are listening and hearing your opinion. Most people have a intrinsic need to have their viewpoints be heard. Without eye contact, vocal inflection and all the other behavioural clues that come with direct personal contact it is easy to feel as though your opinions and arguments are not being heard. That can lead to frustration which can quickly derail a good discussion. I'm also a realist, so I believe that although there are obvious problems that will come with this new raiding system, I believe that it is a given it is coming and I believe that as a whole package it is an improvement on the current system. Therefore, having listened to people's concerns, I am more apt to think how are they addressed within the system we are getting than to spend my time trying to develop a different better system. That doesn't mean discussing alternatives is bad, it's just not where I focus my thoughts.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    141
    I do see a great chance in the Cataclysm raiding system, mainly because I'm not happy with the current state. I do suffer from burnout because I had to run ICC 10 man to be prepared the best way possible for progression in ICC 25. So I appreciate this new approach.

    But Blizzard has to solve a lot (and by a lot I mean A LOT!) of problems and I do admit that we cannot look at Blizzard plans from our WotLK point of view. If you adapt the WotLK raiding system to the Cataclysm system it would result in a disaster. And just because I love WoW I hope that Blizzard can pull it off.

    Guilds will suffer from the change as they did with the Vanilla -> BC switch. It will mostly not be the top 500 guild (well maybe more let's say all guilds who managed to get all the WotLK meta-achievements and/or the TotGC 50 tries left run), they will do their stuff just as they did in the last 5 years. It will be the guilds with less progress but those guilds are the majority of the raiding guilds and that will lead to a great shift in the way we play WoW.

    In my very own guild (8/12 heroic) a lot of player say that they will switch to 10 man raiding as soon as Cataclysm gets shipped. I remember the problems my guild had when the majority of our members reached level 70 and it almost collapsed but we managed to start raiding successfully again because we had no alternative; doing 25 mans was the only way to go.

    But with Cataclysm there is this alternative we hadn't at level 70 and I do believe that we are not getting out alive this time. Just to many player are not willing to bear those few bad players anymore that almost every guild has.

    So yeah, we will see a lot of guilds disbanding.

    Another problem (but one Blizzard can solve because they did in the past) will be the amount of content you need to provide to keep player with more playtime interested. They did so in BC but didn't in WotLK. So again it is dangerous to adept Blizzard plans for Cataclysm on the WotLK raids. So raiding only one format must provide content for 3-5 nights of raiding.

    I guess we have to wait for more info on the topic from Blizzard and see the changes with our own eyes. Perhaps the beta will help us to make up our minds.

    Only the future will tell :P .
    Wer reitet so spšt durch Nacht und Wind?
    Es ist der Kodo mit seinem Rind.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by Spiritus View Post
    Again, Mwawka, the points you bring up are only from a 10man perspective arguing against a 25man perspective.
    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. 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.
    Are these 25-man guilds ones that don't run 10's by choice? Or ones that don't need to run them any more because they have all the badges they need? One won't notice the difference and the other will hurt at the beginning of a content tier before moving into "don't care about the shared lockouts" territory.

    As for 10-man raiders that pug 25's (like me), well, I won't be able to pug 25's any more. For the most part, I was only doing them because they drop better gear than what I've got access too and because I needed more emblems.

    Where I think some weird things are going to happen is when the distribution of serious guilds shifts and 25's don't have a monopoly any more. I'm not saying that 25's will die, but there are 25-man guilds (perhaps many) that will either switch to serious 10-man raiding guilds when they choose to drop the 15 players they feel have been holding them back, or will simply cease to exist as 2-3 serious 10-man guilds take their places.

    On another side note, I think there's going to be a strange shift in 10-man guilds too. Presently the distinction of serious vs. non-serious has been "first, do they run 25's?" followed by "okay they do. So, are they serious about them?" with the determination being yes if and only if "yes" was the answer to both questions. With the ability to be considered "serious" given equal treatment in 10's as well, you're going to see a shuffle of players in 10-man guilds as the good players in those guilds actively look to congregate together for progression in the smaller format.

    The damage this is going to do to casual 10-man guilds has been completely ignored I think.

    ...good catch. Assuming that's what you were trying to point out Spiritus.

    As for this issue, from my experience casual guilds roll with punches and adapt to change at the social level a lot better than serious guilds do. While some casual guilds will cease to exist, a lot of others will simply swap mains for alts as the need arises and rotate in some people who have maybe never raided before, or who quit earlier and haven't raided in a while.

    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?

    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.
    They'll have to handle it just like casual guilds have to handle losing their best and brightest when they jump ship to a 25-man guild because they want to get into some "real" raiding. Except, those 25-man guilds, if they've been well run and create an environment that makes raiders want to stay, won't be losing their best. They'll be losing their worst. The lazy. The people who couldn't cut it in 25's in wrath who think that 10's will be "easier". The loot whores. And, of course, the people who didn't actually want to be there but felt forced to raid 25's for the better loot (which may well be some of their best in this case, but will be better for all involved in the long run IMO).

    Make no mistake. Roster will suffer and guilds will cease to exist. But on the flip side, new guilds will rise to take their place. We're not talking about an endangered species here. We're talking about power groups in a social environment. The vacuum's will fill.

  4. #64
    Yes we dont know all the details yet, but we all know the Ďextra benefitsí to keep 25mans to be viable would need to be substantial. A little extra loot per person simply wont cut it imo. Serious raiders are competitive; i donít believe its gear that drives them. Theyíll want to be in the top progressed guilds, to keep 25s equally as progressed as 10 mans the differences would have to be huge.

    For a start, it so much easier to find 10 great players than 25 great players. Its also much easier to find 10 players that will play 24/7 or at least much longer. A 25 man has a 2.5 times great chance for DCs, lag or other excuse to hold up the team, 2.5 times the people AFKing after a wipe ect ect. I donít know but ive always found 10 mans to be faster than 25s even if explanations/ strat chat isnít required.
    Ok so more loot in 25s makes it all better? I donít think so, and heres why. I look back at to the start of this expansion, we hit Nax as soon as we could, a few crafted, a few blues and the odd green to hit up Nax. We were an established 25 man guild in BC but the first 10 to be ready hit Nax and cleared in on the 16/12/08. Now the 25 man clear didnít happen until 26/1/09. We probably cleared the 10 man with a player base of 12 or 13, the 25 man probably took 35 and mostly likely more as people in this game just disappear for whatever reason. Its like a speed boat Vs the titanic, unless the speed boat is towing one massive anchor (difficultly level would have to be insanely harder than 25s) i donít see how the titanic can win the race.

    What may happen is 25 mans guilds break into 3 x 10 mans, smash out the progression and then switch to 25s to farm out the loot. Revert back to 10 mans for heroic progression and so on. One thing i know for sure is the competitive nature in gamers will be greater than any gear.

    This is why (and i know it wont happen), id rather see both 10s and 25s scrapped and just have 15 mans, with extra content. Problems solved, both raid sizes give a bit and 15 is enough to get most class and buffs in. For mine 10 mans has always felt, restricted. But boy are they efficient! Anyway time will tell of course, but my money is firmly on 10 mans to dominate progression.

  5. #65
    If you can find 15 people who want to pug a 25man instead of a 10, you can find 25. There's certainly no shortage of players in WoW.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    361
    Its also much easier to find 10 players that will play 24/7 or at least much longer.
    lol. Well if you can defy the time space continuum you truly are in a league of your own.

    2.5 times the people AFKing after a wipe ect ect.
    Its up to the guild officers/raid leaders to deal with chronic afks. In 10 man you stick out like a sore thumb. In 25 you can try to "blend in". But there will always be more people who want to raid than people offering slots to raid. If need be its time to bench or replace said person. No ones time is more valuable, its disrespectful to everyone and should be dealt with.

    What may happen is 25 mans guilds break into 3 x 10 mans, smash out the progression and then switch to 25s to farm out the loot. Revert back to 10 mans for heroic progression and so on. One thing i know for sure is the competitive nature in gamers will be greater than any gear.
    Two problems i see with this scenario"
    1) You are stretching your groups thin by having no reserves, all it takes is for one person to be a no show for the other 9 to lose gear/experience for a day or for the week
    2) Raiding a 25 once a month hurts your group synergy. Long stretches of time when you dont work with people makes the experience clunky. You're better off just sticking to a raid size and maxing your performance in it.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    1,632
    Quote Originally Posted by Lore View Post
    If you can find 15 people who want to pug a 25man instead of a 10, you can find 25. There's certainly no shortage of players in WoW.
    Right but the issue now is you only get to have 1 size raid a week a 10 or a 25 (not both). Casual or not people still take their WoW pretty seriously. Who in their right mind is going to chance downing 1 boss and being saved to a fail 25 pug when they can do it in a 10 where the risk is smaller?
    There is something so appealing about backhanding someone across the face with a shield.

  8. #68
    Just to throw out a very quick and simple observation, skipping over a lot of the details, semantics about how things will work, and any belly-aching nonsense....


    It's of my opinion Blizz is trying to go for a very simple goal:

    - If you prefer 10 man raiding, raid 10 mans.
    - If you prefer 25 man raiding, raid 25 mans.

    Just that, nothing more. Just pick the size of raid you prefer doing and do it.


    A lot of the complaining I've seen, mostly around other areas, is due to prestige. More specifically, the loss of prestige. It is the nature of MMORPG communities to seek optimization and push things to the limit, and WoW is no exception. But sometimes it can feel like they push the idea of fun away, or at least anything outside their idea of fun. Blizz is trying to make the game accessible to all, and for some reason quite a few people find that a bad thing. Sometimes you just have to ask if they're really playing the game because they enjoy it.

    Blizz' goals can definitely seem a bit crazy if you're locked into the idea that only the best and most dedicated players get the best stuff.... but they're just wanting everyone to have fun in their own way. At least that's my interpretation of the changes.


    Pick the raid size you have the most fun in.
    Find a group of people who share that opinion.
    Have fun in the raid size you prefer.

    That's it.
    He who isn't afraid to stand by his ideals...
    Isn't afraid to stand alone.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Hammerfists View Post
    lol. Well if you can defy the time space continuum you truly are in a league of your own.
    Oh man you mean to say there isnt more time than 24/7? Damn, let me worm out of this one and say i meant more time than a 25 man team can invest. Phew that was close, thanks buddy.

    Its up to the guild officers/raid leaders to deal with chronic afks. In 10 man you stick out like a sore thumb. In 25 you can try to "blend in". But there will always be more people who want to raid than people offering slots to raid. If need be its time to bench or replace said person. No ones time is more valuable, its disrespectful to everyone and should be dealt with.
    After the first one i really dont know why im bothering, maybe because i have all this extra time . Of course in this perfect world id gladly replace them in heartbeat. Fact is with 25 there is a 2.5 times higher chance for somebody to cause a delay. Be it a disconnection, someones at the door, their dog spewed up or whatever. Surely its easier to find 10 people that will do the right thing than 25?

    Two problems i see with this scenario"
    1) You are stretching your groups thin by having no reserves, all it takes is for one person to be a no show for the other 9 to lose gear/experience for a day or for the week
    2) Raiding a 25 once a month hurts your group synergy. Long stretches of time when you dont work with people makes the experience clunky. You're better off just sticking to a raid size and maxing your performance in it.
    1) Id imagine any 10 man team would have a reserve or 2. No different in my scenario, only you need 36 players, which many 25 man raid guilds wouldnt have much trouble getting to.
    2) Who said anything about once a month? If content is cleared in 10 man, then one cant progress any further. The next logical step in my mind would be to farm the place out in preparation for the next tier. If 25 mans are dropping more loot person, then guilds might want to pursue that option since they only get to kill the boss once per week anyway.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    6
    good shirt!!!! lol nice message

  11. #71
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    123
    The biggest problem will be to make 10-mans rewarding enough for hardcore players. If not, they'll still be "forced" to do 25-mans, even if they would prefer 10-mans. A couple things come to mind regarding this: Shared Achievements, legendaries dropping only in 25-mans, big difference in loot amounts slowing down progression too much in 10-mans, special loot like mounts in 25-mans only, ...

    It'll be very hard to balance and I doubt blizzard will manage. They'll have to add something significant to 25-mans to keep it attractive, which means the hardcore players will be forced to do 25-mans. If not, top guilds will just take the easy bosses in 25-man, drop out 15 lowest dps/healers and finish up in 10-man scoring the server first achievement (or continue with 10 in the middle of the night/early morning when they lack players for 25-mans)

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    1,548
    There's something I'm trying to figure out. If Blizzard tries to balance 10's and 25's evenly and everyone does 10's how is that a bad thing? I can see it killing raiding the same way that 25s killed raiding for 40s. The only difference here is the illusion of choice. If everyone goes with one or the other the fact that there was a choice doesn't even matter. If the "votes" are distributed more evenly then pretty must this entire thread is invalidated. When 40s died in favor of 25s there were some gripes and then everyone adapted and a lot of people were happy in the end. Would they have raided 25s if 40s were available with the same reward at the same difficulty? I suspect 25s would still have been the dominant raiding format in TBC if the option existed.

    Edit: When everyone says nice shirt they mean "you make that shirt look good" because everyone here is stalking you, Lore. Everyone.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    3
    Personally I am sure 25 man raiding will adapt and prevail. Mostly because you just cannot balance two formats to the same difficulty. Some fights will inevitably be a roadblock in one format and much less of an obstacle in the other one. There is a very misguided assumption that most fights will be easier in 10 man format. It may not be the case at all. I would be inclined to believe the split will be around 50:50.

    So progression guilds will effectively operate switching formats (probably unfortunately with excessive use of alts testing etc.) to milk the faster progression format on boss by boss basis.

    That brings all the drama and management difficulty of core raiders (25 man) and "core-core" raiders (10 man) but people who want progression glory will take it.

    The only problem is that all the 10 and 25 balancing etc. is just a bit silly in my opinion. It is a heroic struggle in to pathc up a self-inflicted, easily removable problem! Just revert to a "normal" mode. One raid, one format! Some raids will be 10 mans, some 25 mans. Hell! Throw in some 15 or 20 if you feel like it! Guilds and raiders will manage. What it'll lead to is bigger guilds with "main team" going for whatever they're going for on a given reset while others will have enough numbers to organise something as well.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodasafa View Post
    Right but the issue now is you only get to have 1 size raid a week a 10 or a 25 (not both). Casual or not people still take their WoW pretty seriously. Who in their right mind is going to chance downing 1 boss and being saved to a fail 25 pug when they can do it in a 10 where the risk is smaller?
    Who says the risk is going to be smaller?

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    64
    My concerns with the changes to raid lockouts are the same concerns I have with removing 'important' buffs. WoW players have a highly variable degree of skill, computer equipment, and connection. Some people are east coast playing on servers in Seattle. Some are in Australia or other places in the world.

    While some guilds can do 25s with people who are optimal for the server, with good computers, and with good latency, there are a relatively few number of those people. They fill the top X guilds. Then there are some people who have those qualities and not enough time that a top X guild requires. They fill some or all of a portion of the next Y guilds.

    The remainder of people have some sort of issue that impacts their play. These people want to complete content as much as anyone else and many feel that they're just as good as those top X players. These people fill the remainder of the ranks of the 25s. Guilds in the 500-1000 spots in progression may have only 5 of these people (the moonkin, the elemental shaman, the destro warlock, generally). Guilds in the 1000-1500 spots may have 10 of them. Guilds in the 1500-2000 spots may have 15 and so on and so forth.

    Generally though, those people join 25 mans because then they gain the benefits of playing with the 10-15 people that don't have those issues.

    Two changes that Blizzard is implementing in Cata will cause major problems with those kinds of people.

    1) Removing unique buffs.
    2) Making 10s a viable alternative path.

    With Blizzard removing unique buffs it means that the guilds in the 500-1000 spots are going to drop those people. There's no reason to keep them when you can have the frost DK that has 2 GTX480s or the mage that has 50 latency to the server. This means that there are more 'problem' people in the population.

    With making 10s a viable alternative path, the 25s that are made up of 10-15 good players and 10-15 problem people will disband. The good players won't want to 'carry' the problem people.

    This leaves a large population of problem people who will be attempting to raid. Blizzard will then see that the largest population isn't getting through the content and therefore the content will become easier until Blizzard reaches whatever percentage of people they want to be able to raid. So the only place I see these changes leading us to is easier and blander content. Maybe they'll add heroic modes that are targeted for a higher level of skill, but they seem loathe to change boss mechanics majorly so even those heroic modes are likely to end up bland.

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    21
    I think that this tuning that Blizzard is talking about will be much easier than some people seem to think. This is because the difficulty in 25 mans is almost directly caused from having to organize so many people and get them to coordinate effectively. Once that is down, 25 man content is similar, in my opinion, to 10 man content.

    In fact, I think that just the change of having both raids drop equivalent loot will solve a lot of the tuning problems. I read some of the earlier replies to this thread and they mention that 10 man is considered easier content because people are coming in from the previous 25 man tier gear and dominating something tuned for the previous 10 man tier gear. I agree wholeheartedly with this.

    And, as for this killing 25 man content or making it a less attractive option to do, I think that's B.S. 25 man content is already not very attractive to many people, but these people feel the need to do it to get the best quality of gear available. For those that it is attractive to, they will still run the 25 man dungeons. This change really just gives people a couple of avenues to achieve the same goal.

  17. #77
    My two coppers. I have raided in this game for a long while since the last 7 months of the original game. We started on ZG and ended on Naxx right before BC. While there were 40 man raids there were also 2 - 20 mans (ZG & AQ20) and 2 - 10 mans (UBRS & LBRS) or that's how I raided them. Though I hear Strat and Scholo started out as raids, by the time I there they got reduced to 5 mans. In BC, we had Kara & ZA. Everything changed in WotLK.

    Now, instead of independent raid instances for smaller raids, we have parallel paths. This creates a few conflicts. People say this is just a game. Well, games at their highest levels are played by professionals for a lot of money. Games at very low levels are played by a bunch of friends who don't really care. The varying degree of competition depends upon the motivation. The harder something is to complete the greater the incentive usually has to be. Its not an absolute but is a true statement most of the time.

    Though Arenas are highly competitive so is raiding. Guilds look to progression as a measure of how skilled one guild is compared to another. I'm sure there are other comparisons but this one jumps out. This is one of those conflicts that seems to be festering. Somehow, those in 10 mans feel they don't get their due in this chest thumping, as if the people who raid 25 mans don't actually think they're just as good. 25 man epeen vs 10 epeen. I say this as an observation of the many posts in the many forums on this announcement and not as some empirical measurement.

    The 10 man raids as they are right now have everything they need to be successful. The argument about "strict" ten man guilds and how others(those with 25man gear) are overgeared to run them is actually specious at best. All instances are cleared quickly in the beginning by people who wear the prior tier. Those that first cleared Naxx in 25 man were in a lot of Sunwell & Tier 6. All content can be cleared if the skill & team work of those participating are at the highest level. So if 10 mans have everything they need to complete, why does the design need to change to let them have the same gear unless its about epeen? If 25 mans are supposedly going to stay together because they are having fun why doesn't the same apply for 10 mans, now? Why change the design?

    On the other hand, the argument for 25's to have a higher gear level comes out of a sense of motivation and meritocracy. The ability to corral 25 people (not including the bench) is a roll coaster ride. New content brings in people while waiting for xpacs watches them wander away. There are many cycles to managing high volumes of people in a voluntary game. Many are mentioned here so I won't reiterate unless its necessary. People usually follow the path of least resistance. Except for those that already have the highest skill level in 25 mans, most will go 10 man for the same rewards. Example - the king's buff in ICC. How many turn it off. I know no one (there maybe but I don't know them) even those at the highest level that turn it off. Its the same instance for the same rewards, why? Path of least resistance.

    It is argued that 10s and 25s will be the same skill level. First, I have only found one fight to be harder and that was Sarth 3d. No other fight in the game has been harder personally. Even the difficulty to Sarth 3d, was stated by Blizz not to be something they designed for but an after thought. But, the real challenge which I don't think they can duplicated between the 2 raid structures is what it takes to create the teamwork between 25 ppl and 10 ppl. The synergy and skill are what make a team successful. It just takes more time for 25 ppl than 10 with the same starting parameters. Teamwork isn't an instant for either. So, a 25 man could be faster than a specific 10 but 90%> it won't be.

    Apologize for the wall of text but there are many strings of thought throughout these pages. I personally raid 10s and 25s because I like to raid, not for the gear. The parallel path I believe is the conflict. Never before did we get content limited as we do with this. The idea that the motivation is more gear doesn't do anything. My personal reason that I don't think this design should be implemented is the lore of the game. The world's greatest dragon, does it take cities or armies banding together to take it down, no, 10 ppl. Its weak. I think all end-instance raid bosses should take a large amount of people to defeat, maybe a few guilds. It's suppose to be epic when you take out Dragons and Gods. This design takes the epicness out of the game.
    Last edited by Lyonhearrt; 05-08-2010 at 02:59 PM.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    361
    After the first one i really dont know why im bothering, maybe because i have all this extra time . Of course in this perfect world id gladly replace them in heartbeat. Fact is with 25 there is a 2.5 times higher chance for somebody to cause a delay. Be it a disconnection, someones at the door, their dog spewed up or whatever. Surely its easier to find 10 people that will do the right thing than 25?
    You have to differentiate between potential and fact. The potential for this to happen in a 25 is higher than 10. Doesnt mean that there arent 10 that have more people afk during trash pulls than 25. Its up to the leadership to establish checkpoints in a raid night to allow for people to take care of business whatever that may be. If you are constantly answering your phone or getting up to do something during a raid and i was a leader of this guild i would not look for that person to be in the core of my guild. This is bench material. But i digress: there is potential but is it a universal truth, no.

    1) Id imagine any 10 man team would have a reserve or 2. No different in my scenario, only you need 36 players, which many 25 man raid guilds wouldnt have much trouble getting to.
    2) Who said anything about once a month? If content is cleared in 10 man, then one cant progress any further. The next logical step in my mind would be to farm the place out in preparation for the next tier. If 25 mans are dropping more loot person, then guilds might want to pursue that option since they only get to kill the boss once per week anyway.
    What may happen is 25 mans guilds break into 3 x 10 mans, smash out the progression and then switch to 25s to farm out the loot. Revert back to 10 mans for heroic progression and so on. One thing i know for sure is the competitive nature in gamers will be greater than any gear.
    So than realistically you will be running 25s after you get 10m on farm. The reason i dont see this as a vialble solution now that its cleared up:
    1) Synergy- Wont be there after your long hiatus in 10
    2) Progression- Until you kill the last boss in hardmode you are still in progression, lots of good players look at your achievements to see where you are. If you are flopping around you will never reach your max potential
    3)Complex Structure- If 10 will be on par to 25 unlike today that means you will need 3 raid leaders (not to mention 6 well geared tanks instead of 2/3 for 25) who will not only have to manage there 10 but have to devise a plan for 25, its much simpler to just go with a size and stick with it. Now im sure there might be guilds out there that opt for this i just dont see this idea hitting mainstream

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Missouri, USA
    Posts
    1,342
    Quote Originally Posted by Lore View Post
    Who says the risk is going to be smaller?
    Says the 15 extra people in the 25man who could possibly remember that it is their grandma's sister's birthday party so they type "OMG I'm so sorry, gtg. kthxtho, bai!" and /camp. Just because the difficulty as pertaining to iLVL may be the same, doesn't mean there is the same risk of a PuG raid hitting a brick wall in both raid sizes.

    That is, of course, unless they make the first boss of every raid a hardcore coordination fight, which I seriously doubt will happen.

    EDIT: Or, if you prefer a less colorful example, a simple D/C.



  20. #80
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by Lore View Post
    Who says the risk is going to be smaller?
    I've been in several PUG ICC25s on my alt where we wiped twice on marrowgar and disbanded. I've never joined an ICC10 pug and not gotten to DBS (though it's about 60/40 pre-15% buff on whether you'd get DBS).

+ 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