Page 30 of 40 FirstFirst ...
20
28
29
30
31
32
... LastLast
  1. #581
    10-man & 25-man replaced by 15-man. No? :>

  2. #582
    Quote Originally Posted by masteryuri View Post
    Sinestra, Hagara, Blackhorn, Madness. They were all way way harder in 10 men. Spine was harder in 25 for a day tho, it was hotfixed nerfed and then it was the same but still easier on 25 because you could have 3 resto shaman with spirit link totem's opness.
    Blackhorn was way easier on 10 man than 25 man, it wasn't even close. The severely reduced DPS requirement compared to 25 meant that you could ignore a good chunk of the soaks, whereas you could ignore almost 0 soaks on 25 man at 0%. Madness was also considerably easier on 10 man because of the reduced DPS requirement, although it was way too easy for an end boss on both difficulties. Hagara is only one that I will agree with. Sinestra was only harder on 10 man until they put through the hot fix preventing 2 healers from getting linked at once. After that, it was probably easier on 10 man, because the lighter relative DPS requirements meant you could just 3 heal it and because you have a lot more room to move orbs in 10 man (and a lot less people to DC/lag/derp and kill the raid with them fixated on them).

  3. #583
    Quote Originally Posted by Espe View Post
    Again, it is obvious that the quote is referring to 25s in general. Just read it again and see.

    And again, there are already plenty of incentives for doing 25m instead of 10m. Some people just want the greater executional challenge of 10m. Some people like the easier route to gear and are willing to put up with the logistical (read: outside of the actual raid instance) effort required to get it in 25m.

    It's that simple.
    No it's not, quote was taken out of context and was talking about LFR only. It was followed by them saying that 25 man is more complex. Why don't you put a full quote in? If you are going to advocate for 10 man size then you should change your quote since this way no one is taking you seriously due to it being misleading. You're actually hurting relevance of anything you say due to it.
    And mods should be doing something about you, it's about time now. You are having out of context quote in your sig which is highly misleading and is not representing what devs actualy said in that blue post.
    Last edited by Radalek; 2013-01-06 at 03:27 PM.

  4. #584
    Im assuming it will just be some quality of life bonuses for 25 man guilds to make it easier to organise and make it take less time. So small things like a guild achievement that rewards Have Group, Will travel but it has a shared guild cd and can only be used like once per day so it doesn't threaten the whole open world idea so at least the raid can get started a bit faster.

    Also maybe a guild achievement that rewards a set of amazing transmoggable armor, like challenge modes, with the guild colours or something.

  5. #585
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Espe View Post
    Again, it is obvious that the quote is referring to 25s in general. Just read it again and see.

    And again, there are already plenty of incentives for doing 25m instead of 10m. Some people just want the greater executional challenge of 10m. Some people like the easier route to gear and are willing to put up with the logistical (read: outside of the actual raid instance) effort required to get it in 25m.

    It's that simple.
    No it does not.

    http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/...-Q-A?#comments

    The new LFR system you have in WoW now seems like a great way for people who dont have alot of time to donate to raiding guild environments a chance to see content that was most of the time closed to them, however im not a big fan of 25man raids. Is there any plans to add a 10man choice to the LFR system?

    We think 25 works better for Raid Finder. The ratios of DPS to non DPS more matches the player population and there is less risk of getting an unviable group. In 25s you can afford to have a few deaths and you can even pull if you're backfilling a few players. Both really make you stop in your tracks on 10s. In 25, it's easier to fade back into the group if you're still not 100% confident in what you're doing. In 10s, it's harder to be a wallflower.
    Here is the full quote with a source, as you can see it is clearly referring to LFR by both the developer and the guy asking the question. 25 man being a better choice for LFR does not mean players can be boosted in 25 man hardmodes during progression in progression gear, if you are going to refer to that statement, don't quote parts out of context for gods sake. That is because the instance is tuned in a way where 10 proper players can carry 15 others in LFR, that is not the case in 25HC, 25 man was also chosen because there is more dps then tanks/healers, hence shorter queue's.
    Last edited by mmoc0d096f98da; 2013-01-06 at 04:10 PM.

  6. #586
    Quote Originally Posted by tibbee View Post
    Blackhorn was way easier on 10 man than 25 man, it wasn't even close. The severely reduced DPS requirement compared to 25 meant that you could ignore a good chunk of the soaks, whereas you could ignore almost 0 soaks on 25 man at 0%. Madness was also considerably easier on 10 man because of the reduced DPS requirement, although it was way too easy for an end boss on both difficulties. Hagara is only one that I will agree with.
    Blackhorn is such a different fight in 10man compared to 25man. They had different things you had to worry about. 10man required you to coordinate better (who soaks what, when and how), whereas 25man was just pure chaos (everyone soaks as much as they can). I find it laughable you say it wasn't even close. Then which boss was ? Apart from Morchok, I think Blackhorn was probably the closest (or at least near enough).

    Madness had somewhat high dps requirement on 25man, at least compared to 10man, but it wasn't really that hard to achieve. I'd say handling the cooldowns for the tanks so they could survive the impale was harder than the dps check. We had to use 2 bear tanks, because our warrior simply couldn't handle it. Several cooldowns stacked on top of each other and he could take one, but how the hell were you going to take the next time it was his turn to soak when those cooldowns were on cooldown ? Hands down, 10man won this fight in the "which size has the harder boss" -battle.

    If you're going to say 25man DS was harder, at least argue for the fights that actually were harder on 25man. 10man had madness and hagara, 25man had yor'sahj, ultraxion and I dare say zon'ozz. If I really had to list all fights under one raid size or the other, I'd say morchok and blackhorn were harder on 10man and spine on 25man - resulting in 4-4 tie, wohoo. I'm talking about the first two months, before the 5% nerf, mind you. The nerf, once it got high enough, allowed you to skip stuff completely trivializing many of the fights, like killing zon'ozz without ever killing a single tentacle. Do ~10 bounces and just zerg the boss down, heal through the damage. Or solo/duohealing ultraxion. We might've had more wipes on madness due to having too much dps and pushing the arm/limb to 70% too quickly as we jumped to the platform, than we had wipes on the whole fight during progress.

    Coming from someone who favors 25man raids by a pretty big margin when compared to 10mans, don't try to make bosses seem harder on 25man when they were not. Same goes for 10man fans, though.
    Last edited by Arhippa; 2013-01-06 at 04:47 PM. Reason: Correcting a brainfart
    In Soviet Russia, you loot to raid.

    Hippa

  7. #587
    Epic!
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,661
    The suspense is killing me! I want to know.

    I've raided both serious 10man and 25man. I want to raid 25man but all I can find at the moment is a 10man, which isn't what I want so I stick to idle LFR runs every week.

    All in all I personally would like to be rid of 10 and 25 and just have it at 15man raiding. As said though that won't happen in the middle of an expansion, unless they release 1 raid as a 15man in patch 5.4 to see how it goes.

  8. #588
    Perhaps it could be QoL additions to a 25 man raid size. Some examples:
    1. Able to use guild summon in a raid instance similar to Cataclysm but puts an hour debuff on your character "Cannot be summoned via guild summon".
    2. Food buffs have 3 charges, each time you die 1 charge is taken away.
    3. Put a stone in the center of each boss room that appears only after killing it. clicking on this stone gives you a 30% speed increase for 25 seconds (to recover from raid wipes faster).

    Maybe those might spur you into a 25 man guild but not sure. Definitely would sway my opinion if I were a new player.

  9. #589
    A lot of interesting speculation, but none really controversial and realistic.

    Me personally wold like to see the lock outs removed, so you could run 25 and 10 in the same week. Not sure that is controversial
    "Peace is a lie"

  10. #590
    Quote Originally Posted by davesurfer View Post
    A lot of interesting speculation, but none really controversial and realistic.

    Me personally wold like to see the lock outs removed, so you could run 25 and 10 in the same week. Not sure that is controversial
    That would provide an incentive to run both sizes. What they want is to provide a little bit more incentive to run 25, but not so much that people feel obligated to run 25.
    I am the one who knocks ... because I need your permission to enter.

  11. #591
    I would not be shocked if they just do what they have done for the Asian markets except still have a shared lockout. Increase 25 man ilevel by 8 (either the base ilevel or make everything pre-upgraded), and increase the health and damage done tuning of 25 man raids by 8%.

    Having split lockouts is something that GC has alluded to is a cultural difference between Asia and EU/NA, where too many people in EU/US would feel it was an excessive time commitment, but Asian guilds like it. However, I don't think for a second that they aren't testing the 25 man increased ilevel thing to see what impact it has on 25 man vs 10 man participation. If they like what they are seeing, don't be shocked if they go for it here.

  12. #592
    Deleted
    The controversial not ready to spring on you idea they have had is - getting rid of 25 mans completely.

  13. #593
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Count Zero View Post
    That would provide an incentive to run both sizes. What they want is to provide a little bit more incentive to run 25, but not so much that people feel obligated to run 25.
    Yes....but its hard to point to anything that can really work.

    Giving MORE gear and allowing faster gearing wasn't enough.
    Giving different or unique rewards will simply mean players will do both, or the one which has the greatest e-peen.
    QoL and logistics improvement may mean more players are willing to take on the burden of raid leadership, but won't necessarily draw players to 25s.

    Quote Originally Posted by tibbee View Post
    I would not be shocked if they just do what they have done for the Asian markets except still have a shared lockout. Increase 25 man ilevel by 8 (either the base ilevel or make everything pre-upgraded), and increase the health and damage done tuning of 25 man raids by 8%.
    Effectively ruled out already. Still, its not too late to change their minds.

    Having split lockouts is something that GC has alluded to is a cultural difference between Asia and EU/NA
    Split lockouts exist to deal with the issues of players gearing at different speeds, the problems caused by gearing multiple times per lockout and the pressure certain players would be under to raid whether they want to or not.

    What GC referred to was the iLevel increase.

    However, I don't think for a second that they aren't testing the 25 man increased ilevel thing to see what impact it has on 25 man vs 10 man participation.
    They don't need to. They already know. It'd kill 10s. Just like it did before.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2013-01-06 at 09:56 PM.

  14. #594
    Honestly, they should remove both 10 and 25 man raids and just make 15 the norm.

  15. #595
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Yes....but its hard to point to anything that can really work.

    Giving MORE gear and allowing faster gearing wasn't enough.
    Giving different or unique rewards will simply mean players will do both, or the one which has the greatest e-peen.
    QoL and logistics improvement may mean more players are willing to take on the burden of raid leadership, but won't necessarily draw players to 25s.



    Effectively ruled out already. Still, its not too late to change their minds.



    Split lockouts exist to deal with the issues of players gearing at different speeds, the problems caused by gearing multiple times per lockout and the pressure certain players would be under to raid whether they want to or not.

    What GC referred to was the iLevel increase.



    They don't need to. They already know. It'd kill 10s. Just like it did before.

    EJL
    How can they know? And how did it kill 10 mans before when they didn't even exist before that at the first place. That's pure speculation. The only thing they can look at are the numbers on asian servers and 10 mans are not dying there and 25 mans are getting revitalized.

  16. #596
    They've said they don't want to make a normalized raid size, especially mid-expansion, as this absolutely forces everyone to change the way they play the game. You'd force every guild in the world to change their rosters, to either recruit 5 more or drop 10, with a tier about to be released. Because of this, I don't see this 15-man style happening, at least not now, maybe after the final MoP tier is released and has been out for several months, to give time to prepare for the next expansion.

    I also don't see shared lockout being removed, as it was stated this being done in Asia does not set a precedent for the US/Europe. We'll see what happens, I still think a 1/2 upgrade wouldn't be a big deal, though it has been denied as the solution by Blizzard. Plus since 5.2 won't feature upgrade-able items until maybe 5.3, the 10m group would be justified in saying they can't attain 25m level gear for an entire patch.

    In the end, as a 25m raider, I don't need it to be a gear incentive, but it would be nice to have something to encourage the better players to consider 25m. I'm currently 7/16H in a 25m guild, but I know it would be easy enough to go looking for a 10m and achieve more, simply because it is easier to find 9 other skilled players with compatible schedules than to do the same for 25m. World first is a different crowd so let's not bring this into it.

  17. #597
    Quote Originally Posted by MordorFires View Post
    They've said they don't want to make a normalized raid size, especially mid-expansion, as this absolutely forces everyone to change the way they play the game. You'd force every guild in the world to change their rosters, to either recruit 5 more or drop 10, with a tier about to be released. Because of this, I don't see this 15-man style happening, at least not now, maybe after the final MoP tier is released and has been out for several months, to give time to prepare for the next expansion.
    I doubt that Blizzard would ever change to a 15-man setting.

    It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

    Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

    10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.


    Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.


    Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.
    Last edited by Kralljin; 2013-01-06 at 11:08 PM.

  18. #598
    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    I doubt that Blizzard would ever change to a 15-man setting.

    It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

    Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

    10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.


    Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.


    Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.
    At least it wouldn't be as drastic as the change from 40 to 25/10 we had already in the past, and we got used to it.

  19. #599
    Quote Originally Posted by Photek View Post
    At least it wouldn't be as drastic as the change from 40 to 25/10 we had already in the past, and we got used to it.
    Different times my friend.

    Many Guilds were raiding with other guilds together, not high end raids but "lower" raids were often formed by 2 guilds, so this cut simply told them to raid with on their own.

    Also, there was only a single size, no 2 sizes as they are now which is important because both sizes are affected by this differently.

    And lastly, during BC you still had new players coming into the game so that the total number of players grew, which helped to form new Raids.

    Now, there aren't that much new players anymore as during Bc / Wotlk.

  20. #600
    Quote Originally Posted by Kralljin View Post
    I doubt that Blizzard would ever change to a 15-man setting.

    It would create so many problems, 10mans would need to suddenly recruit more people and 25man to cut people.

    Altough in this scenario 25man could "win", they could cut 10 of their worst members to create a better 15man Raid.

    10Man however, had to find 5 equally skilled persons for their raid, it is even hard to find a single decently skilled person for a slot, the flood of kicked 25man raiders wouldn't really help, because they got kicked for reason.


    Not to consider that some Raids might quit altogether because they simply say "We don't want to recruit 5 new people / cut 10 people to be able to raid", for 10man Raids that cannot find 5 equally skilled members, the timer until this happens would be like a Death clock.


    Overall, the raiding community might not be able to withstand such a huge change without suffering huge losses.
    They already made a change like this at the start of BC when they transitioned raids from 40 man to 25 man. That type of change is viable if you do it at the end of an expansion. There is always raider attrition at the end of expansions, and there is also usually at least a 3-4 month farm period before a new expansion is released to. 25 man guilds would be able to drop down to 15 man, just by not recruiting replacements for raiders that quit over the end of the tier/start of the new expansion. It would actually be more than 10 people you would need to drop though. A typical healthy 25 man roster needs about 35 people. and you probably would want to go down to 21-22 for a 15 man raid roster, so it's more like 12-15 people that would have to be dropped, mostly through attrition.

    As far as 10 man guilds, they would probably have more difficulties, because they would need to recruit to expand their roster by 50%, but would hopefully have 6+ months notice to do it. They would have to choose between opening heavy recruitment, or merging with another 10 man guild. 2 10 man guilds that merge would probably have just about exactly the correct roster size by the start of the next expansion assuming roster turn over.

    That said, doing something like this for 5.2, with at most a couple of months of lead time would be catastrophic to the entire raiding community. I can't imagine it's a serious consideration until the end of this expansion.

Posting Permissions

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