Do you include 10 man raids in the World First race?

[Ericprydz]

I raided cata on heroic in worlds top 25 guild, 1st tier of cata - 25 on most fights was a complete joke opossite to 10 man. 10man cataclysm 1st tier raiding was true and last good raiding since TBC. /truestory bro

Tier 11 was a complete beast of a tier for 10man guilds. I did both 25m and 10m world 60+ ranking during that tier and will forever remember it as some of my favorite raiding (along with nearly all of BC).

[Shpetznaz]

There are 3 raiding races:

1. Heroic content
2. 10m Heroic content
3. 25m Heroic content

Paragon got 10m WF before Blood Legion/Method got 25m WF. Therefore Paragon still got WF in Heroic content, and should be considered a world first.

[DeiVias]

4 10 mans in the top 20 3 of which are stuck on Gara'jal.

You can't say 10 man is easier.

[Mr Goodkat]

1. ROTFL. That's a great opinion. You have no idea how much skill, preparation and determination that a 10 or 25 man puts in aside from your own guild, if you even raid for world 1st. If you don't you're FOS. 25man raiding current represents less than 20% of all players raiding right now. I think it was 12% actually.

2. I raided both 25man and 10man in Cata and Wotlk. In Cataclysm it was very balanced. Of course though when we took our 10 best players from the 25man and learned 10 man bosses at the end of the week they were easier. Had we taken our fails it would've been just as hard.

Your other observation regarding alts doing 10 man should be obvious to even you. You can't do the same raid twice in one week so your only option is using an ALT. Duh. You really think Blizzard would purposely make 10man easier? Every guild would switch to the path of least resistance and farm every boss then return to 25man for the glory kills.

It was easier in WOTLK but it was also a whole set of ilevel lower for that very reason. Lesser challenge for weaker loot. Once it was normalized the challenge become equal.

The fact that you can't take a 10man seriously is a character flaw. Blizzard changed it, balanced it, normalized the achievements and said game on.

Great, i knew one genius would come along, not bothering with reading my quote. let me break it down for you.

there are 3000 (7%) 25 man raids and 42000 (93%)10 man raids ranked on wowprogress. now let's create tiers. tier 1 are those guilds that are ranked 1-1000 in a combined 10 and 25 man ranking, tier 2 rank 1001-2000, tier 3 rank 2001-3000, and so forth.

now, if the average skill, determination and time commitment were equal between 10 man and 25 man raiders 25 man raids would constitute 7% of all raids in every single tier. but that is not true at all. 25 man represent almost 30% of all guilds in tier 1, but in tier 10 (9001-10000) they only represent 2.5% of all raids. how many 25 man guilds do you think can be found in tier 20 or 30? as aforementioned in the top 100 45% of all guilds are 25 man raids

was that clear enough?

2. thanks for clarifying that one cannot do both sizes with one char in one id, i didn't get that yet... instead of being so smartmouthed why not elaborate on your statement? so, you did both? please specify

are you a 25 man raider who did 10 man raids too with a second char, killing the same version (fl before the 25% nerf, before 4.3, ds with 0, 5, 10, 15% nerfs) of raid bosses in 10 man and 25 man settings

are you a 10 man raider who did 25 man raids too with a second char, killing the same version (fl before the 25% nerf, before 4.3, ds with 0, 5, 10, 15% nerfs) of raid bosses in 10 man and 25 man settings

OR are you a 10 man raider who killed 25 man raganors hc after 4.3 in ds gear or did 25 man ds with a 30% nerf but killed the 10 man incarnations way earlier?

oh, by the way, could you comment windry's quote in my post too?

carefully reread what you said:" every guild would switch to the path of least resistance" but that's what happened! the vast majority switched to 10 man. yeah, yeah, i know the all "prefer" it. why would they make it easier? because they want to satisfy 2 populations. the bleeding edge raiders who want to raid the hardest possible bosses and they are (or were until paragon downsized) all 25 man raiders, and the huge casual playerbase that generate the huge bulk of monthly subscritpion revenue. do you really think all these casual guilds want bosses tuned at the limit?

[Deleted]

Great, i knew one genius would come along, not bothering with reading my quote. let me break it down for you.

there are 3000 (7%) 25 man raids and 42000 (93%)10 man raids ranked on wowprogress. now let's create tiers. tier 1 are those guilds that are ranked 1-1000 in a combined 10 and 25 man ranking, tier 2 rank 1001-2000, tier 3 rank 2001-3000, and so forth.

now, if the average skill, determination and time commitment were equal between 10 man and 25 man raiders 25 man raids would constitute 7% of all raids in every single tier. but that is not true at all. 25 man represent almost 30% of all guilds in tier 1, but in tier 10 (9001-10000) they only represent 2.5% of all raids. how many 25 man guilds do you think can be found in tier 20 or 30? as aforementioned in the top 100 45% of all guilds are 25 man raids

was that clear enough?

You re trying to explain what you mean with the term "average 10" vs "average 25" to a person that doesnt care about data...
In his opinion 25 is an evil number were 10 great players are trapped with 15 worthless players.
If you try to prove him why "10 mans are the raids that carry bads now" you will only manage to get another responce in the context of the responce you just quoted. I learned that the hard way...

carefully reread what you said:" every guild would switch to the path of least resistance" but that's what happened! the vast majority switched to 10 man. yeah, yeah, i know the all "prefer" it. why would they make it easier? because they want to satisfy 2 populations. the bleeding edge raiders who want to raid the hardest possible bosses and they are (or were until paragon downsized) all 25 man raiders, and the huge casual playerbase that generate the huge bulk of monthly subscritpion revenue. do you really think all these casual guilds want bosses tuned at the limit?

Noo!
It is quite obvious that 10 man was the size that every wow player was dreaming ever since vanila :P
That is why 92-95% of the teams is doing 10 :P
It is much better to say, "i prefer 10" than to say "i am not an idiot and as such, i took the path of least resistance"
Kudos to the guys that keep pushing 25 man content.

[Smoopie]

There are only two categories

World first 10 man
World first 25 man

paragon world first 10 is captured. Now we are waiting on a 25 man kill

Why is that so hard to understand?

you shouldn't compare 10 to 25, they are different no matter how much you want to believe that they arent

[twomoonz]

10 man is harder so yea

[Mortallus]

The options for the poll are not specific enough. There are two world firsts IMO. One for 10 and one for 25. Reason being that there is no metric or methodology (that I can recall; if there is one I would be happy to read it) to measure one over the other.

[Ranaas]

The only "harder" part of 25man vs 10man is to have a more "balanced quality" roster. It's easy to find 5-6 very good dpsers but when it goes to 15-16 , it goes harder to recruit.

If you got 25 high quality raiders , the difficulty is same , in most cases I find 25man easier.

25 man raiding is only harder at semi-hardcore , or casual raiding. For me , I have stucked at elagon 25m now cause we got 5-6 crap dpsers in the guild that we carry all over the place. We would be around 2-3 HC by now.

[Ebbikenezer]

The title of this thread should have been:

"Do you think what YOU feel is more important than everyone else, and that's the only fact available to the rest of the human population?"

Vote now! ====>

() Yes or

()YES!

Why not just shit on everyone's dinner, call it a topic for legitimate discussion and tell us to "eat up!" ?

Edit: It's just too subjective, we all have different feelings on it...... personally I think it's much more of a pain in the ass to get 25 people together for a scheduled raid and depend on them BUT.... if they are of the same caliber as the people in a good ten man... then the 25 always went smoother. The issue is that it really only takes one or two tards to ruin a progressive raid, so do the math: 1-2 out of 25 or 1-2 out of 10. Chances are you'll come across a tard or two when assembling 25 people into a group, and you may not notice. You're much more likely to pick up on it quickly and adjust as necessary for a 10 man. Of course, it's just how I feel, at the end of the day no one should give a shit and should do what they themselves find enjoyable.

[Deleted]

10 man is way harder this Tier

[Jinto]

Perfectly fine to separate world firsts into 10m and 25m. Each format has its difficulties. Debate over which is the real "first" is rather pointless.

Anyway it is kinda of funny how far ahead is Paragon compared to the #2 10m guild in the world.

[Deleted]

Therefore Paragon still got WF in Heroic content, and should be considered a world first.

Technically sure, it's just that "world first" is a meaningless thing in the current raid model. Fights will always have difficulty and tuning differences, it takes a completely different level of effort to build groups capable of racing in 10 and 25, etc. etc. It's completely pointless to even talk about "world first", only "world first 10" and "world first 25" are meaningful races.

[Ryme]

So does this state that the only reason Paragon was able to defeat 6/6 heroic on 10 man was through exploiting Gara'jal?

It certainly hints toward it, yeah. We won't know for sure until we get some videos/logs out.

[velde046]

dps check? brutal on 25m, cakewalk in 10m

Really, not how I feel it... remebering back to Wrath when you could do both 10 and 25, I always felt that Patchwerk was actually easier on 25 than 10... which is one of the most straightforward DPS checks I know of....
In 25 you can get away with people that are a bit subpar, but in 10m that almost always means failure...

[Msi]

No sorry, its way harder to manage 25 people.

[Ryme]

Really, not how I feel it... remebering back to Wrath when you could do both 10 and 25, I always felt that Patchwerk was actually easier on 25 than 10... which is one of the most straightforward DPS checks I know of....
In 25 you can get away with people that are a bit subpar, but in 10m that almost always means failure...

I think the fight still fresh on people's minds is Ultraxion, that fight was a joke on 10 man but challenging in 25. Blizzard's justification to this was that they had to allow for some 10 groups who could not attain each and every raid buff/debuff.

With the further homogenization of the game, Blizzard can tighten up the dps times on 10 man. I mean, look at Gara'jal!

[Heeresman]

I voted yes. WF is WF, regardless of raid sze. 10 players (and i'm looking at Paragon) doing it before anyone else to me is first. Don't matter how you slice or dice it. You beat the End-Boss before anyone else. Operative word being before.
And gz to DREAM Paragon! You Rock.

[Deleted]

How about we just stop this bullshit and call it world first 10 man and world first 25 man

[Grimbolt]

Being an oldschool MMO player, Raiding to me consists of a large group of players doing complicated tasks together to overcome the evil foes.

10 man is not large, so I dont see 10 mans as the "real" world first. technical it is, but I still see more prestige in downing 25 man.

I guess the debate never dies so why not call it world first 10 & 25 kill? spilt it up, because we all know its not the same encounter.