World of Warcraft®

Actually I cannot logistically run 25 mans because I... Have 10 people. 25 mans do not have that same logistical problem which makes the design inherently skewed.

Please tell me which scenario is more likely:

25 man kills heroic Madness on 25. Members now break up and kill heroic Madness on 10.

10 man kills heroic Madness on 10. Members now somehow magically kill heroic Madness on 25.

The flaw in design is brutally obvious, which makes it all the more awkward I had to hold your hand through it just now.Also to the guy above me... I actually laughed out loud. OH NOES, WHERE WOULD A 25 MAN GUILD FIND 10 WHOLE PEOPLE TO CLEAR AN INSTANCE. Thanks for coming out.

Obviously a group that had 25 people would more likely clear something that only required 10 people in there off time.

Your argument is you don't want to so no one should be able to.
again
Your argument is you don't want to so no one should be able to.

Indeed, removing the shared lock out but keeping rewards the same just creates more options. For example a guild that does 10 man progression and 25 man casual raids, ultimately this model accommodates more people since you can have 10 people who want hard mode progression playing with 15 other people who just want to kill stuff and mess around.

I agree with removing shared lock outs but make it where someone who is working on a legendary in raids can only choose between the 10 man or 25 man route. If someone loots legendary drops from a 10 man then they are flagged for 10 mans for legendary weapon progress.

The only thing unfair about them is that bleeding edge guilds will be forced* to raid the same place 3 times durign every lock out in order to "keep up with the Jones". Main 25m raid, 2-3 10m raids and multiple LFR raids with a few non loot sharing mains and 20+ alts.

It's a recipe for burn out. And it does put 10m guilds at distinct and irrefutable disadvantage in terms of PvE progression.

*No, no one will put a gun to these people's head and literally FORCE them to do this but they will do it in order to maximise their loot gain in order to reach for world/region/server firsts.

This.

They need to incentivize guild leaders/officers to run 25s. Then 25s will exist again.

No YOU please stop. Not every guild in wrath did that, your "evidence" is based on your own damn experience. It doesn't help that 10 man icc was A LOT !@#$ING EASIER THAN 25 MAN HEROIC ICC. Group comp didn't matter as much, loot didn't matter as much, as a lot of the 25 man normal drops were better. There were no reasons for people to get upset that they weren't being brought because the 10 man content was PUGGABLE.

You don't know what the %^-* you are talking about.

Not every guild did that, but I did, and I don't know what I am talking about? So I know nothing about what I myself experienced? Hmmm, that makes sense.

Also 10 or 25, despite our differences, anyone here that actually raids will tell you that they did 10 and 25 content during Wrath because they could; and when you can, you do.

I did it for achievements. Forget that noise of doing it because I could.

04/16/2012 09:36 AMPosted by Sanctinius

Well in all fairness I am fighting quite a lot of people at once, so my defensiveness should be expected. Also you just kind of completely failed, nowhere did I say that my preference outweighs the preference of others. I actually never requested anything change at all, I think the current system is quite good.

Read carefully now, I said very clearly that if you have no other case to make then all you've put forward is your personal preference. considering that taken into account how you've presented your case thus far, and your rather harsh tone towards the 25 man community, you do seem to place a lot of conviction in defense of your own personal preference, which is all we have to go by since you've made no other case regarding why you prefer 10s.

I did however state that it is not Blizzards fault or responsibility that 25 man raiding is declining, and to be honest your entire statement above doesn't really make any sense because it appears to be a rebuttal for an argument I never made.

I will try to sum up my point in a single sentence:

25 man raiding should sink or swim solely on its own merits, which path it takes is in the hands of the community.

But it is, because pound for pound, the two are not on equal footing to be judged based on their merit. 25 mans are more work to make and maintain, even if the difference is microscopic, it's a factor in determining how people will judge the work:reward ratio. The two are not the same, should not be the same. It's like saying that the fat person who can't swim shouldn't be given a life preserver over the leaner expert swimmer. Call it a handicap if you will. The scales are not even by virtue of the numbers, thus the raids cannot and should not be weighed by the same standard of merit. 10s will win every time, that's not fairness, it's a strawman argument.

Uh... This thread isn't about what I prefer. I don't think you even understand what the thread is even about at this point. It is about Blizzard changing game play elements to try and save 25 man raiding.

I then went on to argue that something that people want to do should not take additional reward to get people to want to do - a point that I have yet to see any argument against.

About your second point, it is just plain not true. I have said this again and again and nobody seems to be able to actually respond.

If people PREFER 25 man guilds, then how could 25 man guilds disappear? They are harder to make? WHAT? What happened to all the ones that were there at the launch of Cata, nobody had to make those, they were already there.

They are harder to maintain? In what way? Everyone keeps telling me that most 10 man raiders aren't raiding 10s by choice, that means you have an endless ocean to recruit from, so why can't you?

The only logical conclusion is that you are wrong, people don't want to raid 25s so 25s are dieing. Its logic. Black and white. Deductive reasoning. Cause and effect. I am not arguing my opinion, I am arguing the logic presented by the facts at hand, its stupid easy.

It's a recipe for burn out. And it does put 10m guilds at distinct and irrefutable disadvantage in terms of PvE progression.

So 10 man raids are currently considered to be on the same playing field as 25 mans when it come to determining progression?

Sorry been away from WoW for a long time, and this is all new to me. Game I am coming from only has 54 man raids, so even a 25 seems small to me.

04/16/2012 09:37 AMPosted by Aeriya

*No, no one will put a gun to these people's head and literally FORCE them to do this but they will do it in order to maximise their loot gain in order to reach for world/region/server firsts

How will an LFR alt run help the guilds reach for server firsts again??
Right now people level and gear up multiple alts because one raid per week is not enough.

A separate lockout will help with focusing on one toon and maximize it.

04/16/2012 09:42 AMPosted by Applemask

Read carefully now, I said very clearly that if you have no other case to make then all you've put forward is your personal preference. considering that taken into account how you've presented your case thus far, and your rather harsh tone towards the 25 man community, you do seem to place a lot of conviction in defense of your own personal preference, which is all we have to go by since you've made no other case regarding why you prefer 10s.



But it is, because pound for pound, the two are not on equal footing to be judged based on their merit. 25 mans are more work to make and maintain, even if the difference is microscopic, it's a factor in determining how people will judge the work:reward ratio. The two are not the same, should not be the same. It's like saying that the fat person who can't swim shouldn't be given a life preserver over the leaner expert swimmer. Call it a handicap if you will. The scales are not even by virtue of the numbers, thus the raids cannot and should not be weighed by the same standard of merit. 10s will win every time, that's not fairness, it's a strawman argument.

They are harder to maintain? In what way?

Really? REALLY!?!?!? There is no hope for you.

People's arguement is that the number of lfr raids alone if it's the same system (it won't loot trading is being removed) would be insane until mains got geared. you'd have to do lfr 25 and 10 man as well as capping yourself on jp gear as soon as possible. Assuming you have no mechanics that throw you for a loop and just burn through the raids in 2 hours that's like 4 hours of normal raiding with probably another 2 hours of prep work average per person over the whole week so 6 hours for normal raids. 3ish hours to deal with the first few weeks of idiots undergeared as hell in lfr, again assuming no unnaturally catastrophic raids just longer than normal lfr. sS with the queue time and any prep you would do for that afk time in/before/during and assuming no time to have to actually organize it you're looking at 10+ hours of raid time for at least the first few weeks assuming everything is smooth sailing. That's not including time expended getting raid ready in heroics. That's not including time spent by guild management figuring out who has to go in which 10 man to maximize gear distribution. That's not including inevitable guild drama that slows things down. That's not including a hell of a lot of things. The issue is that the more raids available for people to run the faster burnout occurs. It also GREATLY speeds the ability to burn through content and sit at farm level. Twice as many raids means twice as much gear and gearing up twice as fast. Especially assuming you're distributing loot in a logical fashion and not just using a casual style ms/os/greed rolls or loot council (which nearly always turns into guild leadership circle and friends get gear first). So this increases the need for new instances to be developed at this level to keep these players engaged.All in all it rarely ends well for anyone to increase the high end raid requirements over a certain point.

Alts in LFR decrease the number of rolls against you for gear.

It's a recipe for burn out. And it does put 10m guilds at distinct and irrefutable disadvantage in terms of PvE progression.

So 10 man raids are currently considered to be on the same playing field as 25 mans when it come to determining progression?

Sorry been away from WoW for a long time, and this is all new to me. Game I am coming from only has 54 man raids, so even a 25 seems small to me.

Yes, and It's becoming more so, in case you've not read the past 8 pages. 25m guilds are dying out and being replaced by 10m guilds. Sure the cream of the crop is still 25m raid guilds, but that culture is changing.

The only thing unfair about them is that bleeding edge guilds will be forced* to raid the same place 3 times durign every lock out in order to "keep up with the Jones". Main 25m raid, 2-3 10m raids and multiple LFR raids with a few non loot sharing mains and 20+ alts.

It's a recipe for burn out. And it does put 10m guilds at distinct and irrefutable disadvantage in terms of PvE progression.

*No, no one will put a gun to these people's head and literally FORCE them to do this but they will do it in order to maximise their loot gain in order to reach for world/region/server firsts.

This.

This applies to current content for the first few weeks only. You are arguing that people who have more time to do something will be at a greater advantage than people who have less time... I'm sorry but thats a "No da" situation. People who have more time to dedicate to something can and should be at an advantage.

They are harder to maintain? In what way?

Really? REALLY!?!?!? There is no hope for you.

I picked up on that back on page 5 when starting reading on page 4. They're blinded by some unforeseen hatred of 25 man raiding and thus won't ever accept our arguements as they actively seek to disreguard logic in favor of protecting their opinion.

Set bonuses. Awesome trinkets.

Seriously? You didn't see what happened to a large portion of the top guilds in the world when LFR was introduced a few months ago with 4.3? They all exploited it for set bonues and ended up with 8 day bans.

It's a recipe for burn out. And it does put 10m guilds at distinct and irrefutable disadvantage in terms of PvE progression.

So 10 man raids are currently considered to be on the same playing field as 25 mans when it come to determining progression?

Sorry been away from WoW for a long time, and this is all new to me. Game I am coming from only has 54 man raids, so even a 25 seems small to me.

Pretty much yes, 10 mans are now tuned to be the same difficulty as 25 mans and 40 man raids are a thing long of the past.

The biggest flaw in this entire concept is that Blizzard is in any way responsible for saving 25 man content, or boosting its popularity if you feel saving is not the right word since it still very much exists. Blizzard themselves stated that the motivation to raid 25s is because you enjoy 25s, so if they cannot stand on their own merit why do they deserve to survive?

The mere CONCEPT that 25 man raiding needs more incentive to get people to do it shows that it deserves to fail, you should not need a superior reward than others to play the way you want to play, because playing the way you want to play is its own reward. Please Blizz, don't hurt the flourishing 10 man raiding environment simply because 25 man raid leaders dislike the overhead and logistics involved in playing the way they claim to love.

Exactly, completely agree with this

I picked up on that back on page 5 when starting reading on page 4. They're blinded by some unforeseen hatred of 25 man raiding and thus won't ever accept our arguements as they actively seek to disreguard logic in favor of protecting their opinion.

Meh content that is equally difficult should have equal rewards, people should be running 25 mans because they and here's a shocker want to run 25 mans.

Which they can, what we're seeing is that the vast majority of the player base would rather not run 25 mans if there is an equally difficult and rewarding option.

04/16/2012 09:47 AMPosted by Applemask

Really? REALLY!?!?!? There is no hope for you.

An extremely well thought out retort. It's not that you didn't have a response that countered my original statement, you just felt this drivel was better.

Let me teach you how to have a debate. You take a point someone makes, and then you present a counterpoint; and this goes back and forth until the logical conclusion is met. Ignorant people instead do what you just did, don't take the easy way out.

While that is true. You fail at debate yourself. Your refusal to accept anything that anyone else has to say that differs from your opinion undermines debate. You are more or less plugging your ears and yelling at everyone who argues against you that they are wrong.

If people PREFER 25 man guilds, then how could 25 man guilds disappear? They are harder to make? WHAT? What happened to all the ones that were there at the launch of Cata, nobody had to make those, they were already there.

They are harder to maintain? In what way? Everyone keeps telling me that most 10 man raiders aren't raiding 10s by choice, that means you have an endless ocean to recruit from, so why can't you?

You obviously have not been around a 25 man guild in cata let alone attempted to maintain one.