10- & 25-Player Raid Loot Changes – Patch 5.2

(Locked)

90 Pandaren Shaman
8455
Reasons why hardcore casual 25 man raiding is dying
----------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Most servers can't support 25 man raiding. They don't have enough people interested enough to support 25 man raids.

.........



This goes back to my comment about needing unemployed adults and socially awkward college kids to fill out a successful 25 man progression Guild. Even with good leadership (another requirement) it's hard to fill out a roster since those types are purely driven by iLevel peen. They go where the shinies are. They also go where it's easier to get those shines.

If there was a return to Wrath end game progression those types would gravitate towards successful 25 man Guilds even on low pop servers which have always existed. The rest of the players would still play how they like since most play to be with their friends and don't care about looking e-good.

Unless a server has less than 100 90's they should all be able to support at least one 25 man Guild.
Edited by Indyana on 1/29/2013 11:36 AM PST
90 Pandaren Priest
19000
The bottom line is Blizzard doesn't care about 25 man raids, they just have to do enough to demonstrate that it looks like they care for those of us who want to raid 25 man but can't because of their stupid incentive structure so we will keep raiding 10 man instead and not cancel our subscription.

Those who want loot, will just do 10 man, it's easier. So that leaves only those who want to do 25 man because they prefer a more epic experience to do 25 man. I don't care if there are 1000 level 90s on a server, if there aren't enough people who care about "epic-ness" then you can't do a 25 man raid because why would you intentionally choose more suffering for the same reward. Does anyone actually dispute that 25 man raids are more difficult? That they are more of a pain in the but to plan, staff, coordinate, and direct? Anyone who thinks this has obviously never led a 25 man raiding guild, as I did since vanilla. So you can argue this point, but everyone who knows what they are talking about will realize you're an idiot.

If something is more difficult, then you would normally expect a larger reward. I don't see why 4 or 6 i-levels isn't out of the question, but again, this presumes Blizzard CARES about 25 man. They don't. They care about 10 man, because that's where they get their money.

A small additional random chance of getting a slight bump in i-level is not an incentive that will change this calculus. I could suggest many ways in which this could be done, but what's the point.

I'd offer that making 5 tiers of the same gear, with some being rare/random is only going to exacerbate the gearing problem. It sounds nice, but doesn't everyone know that people will want to keep going until they get a full set of the "good stuff." The motivation is obvious to me, Blizzard wants people to keep coming back to old content even though they don't really need to in order to keep paying their monthly dues. It's a good business model, but bad for raid leaders who have to deal with all the drama.

So, within your model, here is an actual solution that Blizzard won't entertain or implement:

1) Keep the same 3 tiers, LFR, Normal, heroic.
2) Add an item that drops in 10 man and 25 man that allows an item to be "boosted" outside of the existing upgrade system. Call it a Thunderforging stone to match your existing nomenclature.
3) A 10 man Thunderforging stone could boost an item by 6 additional i-levels, and a 25 man Thunderforging stone could boost an item by 12 additional i-levels. Pick 4 and 8, 5 and 10, 6 and 12, whatever but you get the idea.

So a 522 would become 528 with a 10 man stone, or 534 with a 25 man stone. These could in turn be upgraded 2 times with valor points, before or after, using the existing upgrade process.

In order for this to be a viable solution, these stones would have to drop frequently, not rarely, to the point where an actual incentive exists. I would suggest 0.5 per boss in 10 man, and 2 per boss in 25 man, with perhaps 1 per "big boss" in 10 man and 4 per "big boss" in 25 man. This would not provide substantially accelerated gearing pace considering the number of raiders that would man a raid, and the number of runs that would be needed to max out everyone's gear.

However, this is all academic. If Blizzard truly cared about 25 man, they could fix it in an instant. They don't, they care about 10 man. Prove me wrong.
71 Gnome Warlock
875
01/29/2013 11:33 AMPosted by Indyana
Unless a server has less than 100 90's they should all be able to support at least one 25 man Guild.


This assumes that all 100 of the lvl 90 players are:

1) raiders
2) on the same faction
3) skilled enough to not be a detriment to the run on progressive bosses (while technically a 25m "raid group", only killing 1 boss out of 16 on normal through an entire tier because you have more !@#$ than substance in the run doesn't come off as a satisfying experience, just MHO)
4) able to actually tolerate the others enough to run for several hours a week together
5) share enough of a schedule that managing it is sustainable long term.

With the population disparities and the continued migration of raid talent off of lower ranking servers that is a long list of expectations, and thats with it leaving off several other confounding variables on top of it.
90 Night Elf Warrior
10970
This assumes that all 100 of the lvl 90 players are:

1) raiders
2) on the same faction
3) skilled enough to not be a detriment to the run on progressive bosses (while technically a 25m "raid group", only killing 1 boss out of 16 on normal through an entire tier because you have more !@#$ than substance in the run doesn't come off as a satisfying experience, just MHO)
4) able to actually tolerate the others enough to run for several hours a week together
5) share enough of a schedule that managing it is sustainable long term.

With the population disparities and the continued migration of raid talent off of lower ranking servers that is a long list of expectations, and thats with it leaving off several other confounding variables on top of it.


Again, look at my server, Gnomeregan, 1-2 year ago, we used to be 189th server in the US; the raiding progression attracted a lot of new people on the server, and I am sure it has to do with a 25man growing every day here.

If I can pop a 25man with the help of my officers on the 189th server of the US, then anyone with mild dedication can do it on anyserver

And you know whats fantastic about this ? If they actually try to make a 25man, they will initiate more players to raiding because they need new recruits, and the raiding population will grow.

25mans are healthy for the long term of the game, no matter what you might say.
90 Worgen Druid
17805
01/29/2013 11:54 AMPosted by Aestus
However, this is all academic. If Blizzard truly cared about 25 man, they could fix it in an instant. They don't, they care about 10 man. Prove me wrong.

No, they care about them both equally. Which is why they are equally punishing 10s and 25s with this change.
71 Gnome Warlock
875
01/29/2013 11:54 AMPosted by Aestus
So that leaves only those who want to do 25 man because they prefer a more epic experience to do 25 man.


I don't consider 25's more epic than 10's. Having more people around doesn't scream "OMG, so awesome" just because there's more people there, and if you genuinely feel that is all it takes to make something "epic" then SW and Orgrimmar would be the most epic places in the entirety of WoW "because people". But that just goes to the point; what's epic for you isn't epic for everyone else, and while it sucks that you struggle to get the experience you want it shouldn't have to come at the expense of everyone else.

01/29/2013 11:54 AMPosted by Aestus
Does anyone actually dispute that 25 man raids are more difficult?


In terms of the content itself? I do. In terms of logistics and management? No, but that's why I want the logistics and management addressed.

01/29/2013 11:54 AMPosted by Aestus
A small additional random chance of getting a slight bump in i-level is not an incentive that will change this calculus. I could suggest many ways in which this could be done, but what's the point.


About the only thing the majority of the thread seems able of agree to is that this idea of thunderforging is a massive ball of suck. It doesn't work, will actually cause more harm than help for 25's, and is just a new coating on the same failed turd they've been trying to use as a way of keeping 25 man numbers from floundering. Whether they've actually been paying attention, or will try to address this properly in the future (unlikely given GC's comments about logistical support not being the issue), is anyone's guess.

I do hope they will fix it though, because much as I don't want to lose the content I enjoy (or see it diminished in any fashion), I also don't want those who enjoy 25m raiding to have to lose out either.
90 Worgen Druid
17805
01/29/2013 12:07 PMPosted by Narph
If I can pop a 25man with the help of my officers on the 189th server of the US, then anyone with mild dedication can do it on anyserver

Do I need to repeat myself? I had a higher ranked 25 man guild on a smaller server. Is it possible? Sure. But it's not sustainable.

When we finished raiding last March and cleared the content we had to wait nearly 8 months until we had anything new. Back then we quite literally had a roster of 25 people. We would have had DS finished in February but because of our tiny server with no potential recruits, no recruits to the server because no one wants to pay $25 to transfer to a dead server, and no one to fill in for spots when people couldn't make it. After a couple repeat kills we called it for the expansion. It was too difficult to keep everyone's attention when there is so much going on and the potential for calling a raid is so high because if anyone misses we can't fill the spot.

So fast forward through those 7-8 months. We aren't raiding anything (some of us did some 10s to get a mount near the end of Cata). We have some people quit due to attrition; they were done with the game. It wasn't so bad, but since it was over the span of such a long time it added up. How do you recruit to fill several spots at once when you're not even raiding a 25? We could have potentially had some players that still wanted to do one night clears on 25s and been able to fill up our roster with potential recruits, but not when your roster is already thin enough that you can't muster up a full raid. And when we got close to MoP and realized we weren't going to be able to field a 25 man raid at the start of the expansion we lost a couple others.

So then we said screw it. We're moving to a not-so-dead server and going 10s. It had nothing to do with loot (higher item levels for 25 man raids would have not helped). It had nothing to do with drama. It had everything to do with too much time with no content, recruiting difficulties because of a dead server, and the inability to pool talent from our own server because it had an anemic population.

To say server population can be worked around is just absolutely absurd. Go start a 25 man raid on a small server that has no 25s. I dare you.

What they need to do is address server population and change up the server transfer system in some way to promote 25 man raiding (none of this free transfer to servers with 5 people on it).
90 Night Elf Warrior
10970
01/29/2013 12:21 PMPosted by Dysheki
Do I need to repeat myself? I had a higher ranked 25 man guild on a smaller server. Is it possible? Sure. But it's not sustainable.


Dont you see how terribly wrong this ? And how clearly there is a problem when one of the supposed choice isnt substainable ?? Clearly its because everyone loooooooves 10man, that must be it.
90 Worgen Druid
17805
01/29/2013 12:29 PMPosted by Narph
Do I need to repeat myself? I had a higher ranked 25 man guild on a smaller server. Is it possible? Sure. But it's not sustainable.


Dont you see how terribly wrong this ? And how clearly there is a problem when one of the supposed choice isnt substainable ?? Clearly its because everyone loooooooves 10man, that must be it.

Yes, but it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the gear that drops or the achievements earned or whatever else you 25s are clamoring on about. It has to do with server population and absurd $25 transfers (which ends up being a lot more because you damn well know you'd rather transfer alts then level another).
71 Gnome Warlock
875
Narph, I'm going to quote a part of my post and then highlight a word that is critical for why such a change wouldn't work everywhere despite your self-proclaimed success on your own server:

5) share enough of a schedule that managing it is sustainable long term.


With players migrating off server for better progression the model people keep advocating doesn't fit the bill. As for training, I tried training people in Cataclysm when I started a fresh group in Cataclysm. I'd rather lick battery acid off of a lamp post in Fargo during the deepest, darkest dead of winter than go through that again. Being responsible for knowing the mechanics and functionality of all 11 classes and 34 specs (at that time 10 classes and 30 specs) so that you can handhold people through playing something you've never touched was a horrible thing to deal with for the 15 months that I put up with it.
90 Pandaren Shaman
8455
01/29/2013 11:58 AMPosted by Bomdanil
Unless a server has less than 100 90's they should all be able to support at least one 25 man Guild.


This assumes that all 100 of the lvl 90 players are:

1) raiders
2) on the same faction
3) skilled enough to not be a detriment to the run on progressive bosses (while technically a 25m "raid group", only killing 1 boss out of 16 on normal through an entire tier because you have more !@#$ than substance in the run doesn't come off as a satisfying experience, just MHO)
4) able to actually tolerate the others enough to run for several hours a week together
5) share enough of a schedule that managing it is sustainable long term.

With the population disparities and the continued migration of raid talent off of lower ranking servers that is a long list of expectations, and thats with it leaving off several other confounding variables on top of it.


Of course I'm talking faction. If your Ally on Mal'Ganis then that's a different story.

There's a lot of things that a worse on a low pop server. The game just isn't as good for many reasons. An MMO needs players to work. So pardon if I don't take those players into account in this discussion. Low pop servers are an issue Blizzard needs to address as a whole.

Suddenly adding another iLevel above the Hard modes now ala Korea wouldn't change things on those low pop servers at all. For the truly driven who only care about their standing in comparison to the rest of the player base they'll transfer or try to get a 25 going.

TBH making a 25 man Heroic mode that's the top of the difficulty and iLevel mountain may spur Blizzard to do something to help players on those servers you keep bringing up.
90 Night Elf Warrior
10970
01/29/2013 12:33 PMPosted by Dysheki
Yes, but it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the gear that drops or the achievements earned or whatever else you 25s are clamoring on about. It has to do with server population and absurd $25 transfers (which ends up being a lot more because you damn well know you'd rather transfer alts then level another).


Yes it does. Not directly, but when players have a choice, they will take the path of least resistance (10man). This game is ALL about min/maximising.

To solve the deaths of 25man, they need to just counter balance the difficulty of running 25man guilds by the prestige of being a league of its own in raiding, no more 10=25 its such a ridiculous concept, I have no idea how they could beleive it would work at the end of WOLTK
90 Pandaren Shaman
8455
......... I'd rather lick battery acid off of a lamp post in Fargo during the deepest, darkest dead of winter than go through that again. Being responsible for knowing the mechanics and functionality of all 11 classes and 34 specs (at that time 10 classes and 30 specs) so that you can handhold people through playing something you've never touched was a horrible thing to deal with for the 15 months that I put up with it.


So in the same way that someone who doesn't have the time or desire to deal with an organized Guild can run LFR why should the devs not offer a Tier above what you run to those who ARE willing and able to handle the responsibility?

Where do we stop? 5 man Progression raids? 3 Man Scenarios as the be all end game. There are 10's players QQ'ing on the forums that they can't recruit because people are content with LFR. Would the game be a better game with LFR only?
90 Worgen Druid
17805
01/29/2013 12:45 PMPosted by Narph
Yes it does. Not directly, but when players have a choice, they will take the path of least resistance (10man). This game is ALL about min/maximising.

No, in my experience it had 0 impact - directly or indirectly. The people that left were quitting the game - not going to a 10 man. And some of the people that left to go to a different 25 man guild when they realized we wouldn't have the people for a 25 man raid? They went to 25s. There was absolutely 0 loss to 10 man guilds when we couldn't field a 25 man raid.

And at that point? !@#$ yes we decided to go to a 10 man guild than take the absolute extreme measure of building up a 25 man raid at the start of the expansion. At that point the allure of having enough people to start a 10 man raid pulled us in - but we wouldn't have gotten there in the first place if it weren't for the failure of Blizzard to maintain proper realm population and allow a little more freedom in character movement.
Edited by Dysheki on 1/29/2013 1:05 PM PST
90 Undead Priest
14805
01/29/2013 12:11 PMPosted by Bomdanil
Does anyone actually dispute that 25 man raids are more difficult?


In terms of the content itself? I do. In terms of logistics and management? No, but that's why I want the logistics and management addressed.


How do you propose this is done then? What suggestion would you give that would make 25s management better? What would make my life of recruiting and getting my guild going better?

If you can give me a single thing that would make those actually easier, and not just theoretically better, you can win this argument.
71 Gnome Warlock
875
01/29/2013 12:48 PMPosted by Indyana
So in the same way that someone who doesn't have the time or desire to deal with an organized Guild can run LFR why should the devs not offer a Tier above what you run to those who ARE willing and able to handle the responsibility?


Because the tier being advocated isn't based on the skill of the raider, but rather how many warm bodies he can fill an instance with. I'd be fine with a tier of difficulty that goes above and beyond heroic in terms of skill, but having the choice be "pay $60 to transfer to a server/faction that I don't like" or "don't access content I'm paying for" isn't kosher.

01/29/2013 12:48 PMPosted by Indyana
There are 10's players QQ'ing on the forums that they can't recruit because people are content with LFR. Would the game be a better game with LFR only?


No, but I also don't think the game suffered for its introduction either. I'm also going to point out that I've never once argued for the removal of 25's as a raid format, far from it in fact. At most you can say that I don't want to have what I enjoy running diminished or weakened just because someone has arbitrarily decided that 20% of the raiding population being 25m isn't "enough".
90 Undead Priest
14805
01/29/2013 01:05 PMPosted by Dysheki
Yes it does. Not directly, but when players have a choice, they will take the path of least resistance (10man). This game is ALL about min/maximising.

No, in my experience it had 0 impact - directly or indirectly. The people that left were quitting the game - not going to a 10 man. And some of the people that left to go to a different 25 man guild when they realized we wouldn't have the people for a 25 man raid? They went to 25s. There was absolutely 0 loss to 10 man guilds when we couldn't field a 25 man raid.


Grats? So because your guild didn't have the issue, it is impossible for other guilds to have it and have it majorly impact them?

That logic is quite amazing.
71 Gnome Warlock
875
01/29/2013 01:07 PMPosted by Telepathy
How do you propose this is done then?


Free transfers and faction swaps. QoL improvements with regard to consumables and getting the raid together (i.e. HGWT being brought back with the stipulation that it only works for groups of 25 players or more, or to have Warlock stones function in that fashion; cauldrons being brought back at a 25m level only). Having cross-realm content runs for current raids so long as they're done at a 25m level.

The goal is to give 25m raiders access to other 25m raiders with a minimum of fuss and anguish, and to make managing those raiders in the run more feasible once you get them there. Hell, even opening up the guild recruitment tool to be region wide if marked as a raiding guild, with the ability to specify that you run 25's so that recruitment can occur in game rather than at places like guildox or WoW progress would at least be something in the right direction (not that anyone uses the damned thing, but that's a whole other complaint).
Edited by Bomdanil on 1/29/2013 1:34 PM PST
90 Worgen Druid
17805
Grats? So because your guild didn't have the issue, it is impossible for other guilds to have it and have it majorly impact them?

That logic is quite amazing.

I have yet to hear of a story that says: "We couldn't raid because everyone left to do 10s." There are people that are saying they think this is what is happening, but I have yet to see anyone with any direct evidence. All they are is complaining about a small pool of recruits and put the blame on 10s when maybe the people are happier to play 10s and shouldn't be forced to play 25s to maximize your character's potential. And who is to blame them if they are? Why are you forcing people to have to go back to 25s and make it the 'premier' tier of raiding when they're enjoying what they're doing? I don't want to go back. I'm fine how it is. If they try to force people back to 25s by only allowing maximum potential to be reached if you raid 25s I'll quit. I want to have fun and I currently have more fun in a 10 man raid setting.

I'm coming in here with experience on why my guild no longer does heroic 25 raiding. It's a fact. What you say about other guilds is pure conjecture.
Edited by Dysheki on 1/29/2013 1:32 PM PST
90 Pandaren Shaman
8455
01/29/2013 01:11 PMPosted by Bomdanil
So in the same way that someone who doesn't have the time or desire to deal with an organized Guild can run LFR why should the devs not offer a Tier above what you run to those who ARE willing and able to handle the responsibility?


Because the tier being advocated isn't based on the skill of the raider, but rather how many warm bodies he can fill an instance with. I'd be fine with a tier of difficulty that goes above and beyond heroic in terms of skill, but having the choice be "pay $60 to transfer to a server/faction that I don't like" or "don't access content I'm paying for" isn't kosher.



It would be based on skill since the Hard mode Korean 25's are harder. It's also based on the the skill of the leaders to organize and maintain a 25 man progression Guild which we can all agree is harder than keeping a 10 man group going throughout an x-pac.

The LFR player has gated progression because they can't commit to an organized schedule. It's not his or her skill holding them back. They're stuck with a certain difficulty level with commensurate rewards. It's the exact same thing as what your arguing against.

You don't have the patience, skill, stamina or something to run a 25 man Guild so why should the difficulty stop where you decide is best for you?
This topic is locked.

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]