Suggestion: A 6-12-24 Raiding Model?

[Nestoras]

Meh this one turned out to be another "war" thread.
Many people here posted nice thoughts, no matter what they would prefer being implemented.
Another proof i guess that we should start with something fresh, regarding the raiding part of the game, in Mists of Pandaria.

[Jantasir]

Nope. "Almost nobody" in a game with 10 million people is still a very large group, worked perfectly fine in vanilla and TBC. It makes no difference how many people see some particular piece of content, what matters is that everyone has fresh content that suits their skill level and play style -- something WoW is missing now. If anything, Cata showed us that "optimally" allocating resources to content design leads to a dull game that people don't want to play.

You mean the design philosophy they specifically said they were getting away from? The days of being the special snowflake are over. People will get the loot you have, people will see the bosses you see. I do however, love that people are analyzing the reason wow is losing subscriptions. It obviously has nothing to do with the fact that the game is gaining rapidly on a decade old, and the fact that it's lasted as long as it did is a testament to how good the game was/is. To keep millions of people playing for as long as they have, they must be doing something right.

on topic, i'd like to see more of a 10/20 raiding size pretty easy to balance to what we currently use, and they've used 20 mans in the past (ZG and AQ for the newer people). I think adding 2 people to a raid team will be more confusing to those who've been around a bit longer, do you add 2 dps? 1 dps 1 healer? make fights require 3 tanks? 10 man however is pretty set, 2 tanks 5-6 dps 2-3 heals. For 20 man i wouldn't be opposed to seeing fights that required 3-4 tanks and 6 healers, imo that would bring more of the epic back to fights..

[Vastius]

OP
I actually like the idea...6-12-24... sounds good. Will it fix everything? Doubtful. Will it make some things easier and more equal? Maybe. Will it bring back subs? Not this change alone would do that. I see too much 25 v 10 comparisons about which is harder blah blah blah- each has its own challenges. Either way, I like it.

[Deleted]

on topic, i'd like to see more of a 10/20 raiding size pretty easy to balance to what we currently use, and they've used 20 mans in the past (ZG and AQ for the newer people). I think adding 2 people to a raid team will be more confusing to those who've been around a bit longer, do you add 2 dps? 1 dps 1 healer? make fights require 3 tanks? 10 man however is pretty set, 2 tanks 5-6 dps 2-3 heals. For 20 man i wouldn't be opposed to seeing fights that required 3-4 tanks and 6 healers, imo that would bring more of the epic back to fights..

Hey m8, cheers for your reply.
A 5/10/20 model, would offer the same advantages from managerial point of view with what I proposed. Even better, it would make things even easier for the large raids organization.
Also it require no UI change, and no scaling of old content particularly dungeons, since almost none of the old 40s and 25s, are runned at relevant level with fully relevant groups.
And last but not least, if new graphics mean high stress for older pc’s 20 people, will drain system resources much less than 25 or even 24.

On the other hand it has some disadvantages compared to 6/12/24, that made me suggest the later, since we are on it.
- Existing 25s will have to let go 5-7 people rather than 1-2.
- The 10 people raids, will not have the opportunity to cover all classes anymore. In MoP we have 11 classes for 10 slots. Never smt called raid, was unable to offer that option.
- 12 people group would offer better chance for improved setup and certain kite, survival, interrupt abilities that makes a difference in fights, while keeping the size small and intimate. Also rather than making the typical 2-5-3 more complicated, it can make the 2 tanks and 3 healers mandatory rather than optional as it is now, were we do madness normal with 1 tank 2 healers and 7 dps, even before the nerfs. The setup can be a very clear 2-7-3 and the fights can be tuned better in comparison to large raids.
- 6 people groups in the RDF type dungeons provide shorter queues, I won’t argue much about how shorter they would be, but definitely not longer.
- 6 people core groups scaled directly up to 24 would require 4 tanks 4 healers and 16 dps. Now with 25 scaling directly up we have 5 tanks 5 healers and 15 dps. That is one of the issues with shortage of tanks for dungeons, and it is getting partially addressed. Basically, you re making the group ad raid creation less restricted by the more unusual roles, increasing the % of dps representation in dungeons, in small raids to bring it closer to the % of dps in larger raids, normalizing the model.
- And last, with a 5-10-20, you have 10, but you don’t have 25. That by it self might prevent people to move on, since 10 was kept unchanged while 25 diminished. Might look to some as a victory or a defeat, and if it is vocalized, it will negate the advantages that brings with it.

OP
I actually like the idea...6-12-24... sounds good. Will it fix everything? Doubtful. Will it make some things easier and more equal? Maybe. Will it bring back subs? Not this change alone would do that. I see too much 25 v 10 comparisons about which is harder blah blah blah- each has its own challenges. Either way, I like it.

The change of model by it self will improve, not fix some of the aspects of the 10/25 dead end. As I said at my initial post, the equation does not have only one variable, and on my initial post, I even forgot to mention LFR as a new variable into this mess.

Again, I am saying that I am approaching the problem trying to cover all different point of views regarding raiding.
Hardcore vs Casual
Skilled vs Scrub
Intimate supporter vs epic supporter

Now we delt with blizzards foul to not factor into their analysis the variable
4) Management of small size vs. management of large size.
Was this the only thing that needs an update? In my opinion not. It is like males and females in modern societies. We are equal we re not the same. In that case, a separation of achievements, with the addition of the number next to achiv title would be required. Make them also mutually exclusive, you get the version you kill first as guild, and as individual, in order not to force people to grind them and that’s it!
Those 2 changes combined, would do more to improve things.

Still, the wild card in MoP, is LFR, and how much it will affect the design of future fights. If they are like DS ones…you know what I wanna say!

[Brett Skullcrack]

The days of being the special snowflake are over. People will get the loot you have, people will see the bosses you see.

When were people special snowflakes in this game? As far as I know the monthly fee has always bought every single player exactly the same thing: access to the game. If you think someone is a "special snowflake" just because they did some other content than you did, then I suggest you take this game too seriously.

I do however, love that people are analyzing the reason wow is losing subscriptions. It obviously has nothing to do with the fact that the game is gaining rapidly on a decade old, and the fact that it's lasted as long as it did is a testament to how good the game was/is. To keep millions of people playing for as long as they have, they must be doing something right.

That failed argument has been debunked many, many times. Did you not buy a brand new box just a year ago, did you not pay a fee for every month you played? It's not an old game in the sense you're insinuating. Furthermore, the whole argument is completely vacuous because "old" is a subjective term, if WoW had crashed in TBC you could've said it's because the game is "old", if it crashed in WotLK you could've said the game is "old", or had it crashed five years from now you could've said it's because it's "old". Just saying "it's old" is meaningless.

[Deleted]

When were people special snowflakes in this game? As far as I know the monthly fee has always bought every single player exactly the same thing: access to the game. If you think someone is a "special snowflake" just because they did some other content than you did, then I suggest you take this game too seriously.

You are correct.
The point is that some things are part of the game now, and it would do more harm removing them, even if previous models were better.
Violent changes allienate playerbase, like the sudden difficulty of the initial heroics, and the brutal nerfs of firelands.
Moderate, gradual changes to the direction you deem correct have more chances to accomplish anything.

Indications so far about company's point of view though, discouraged me from keep trying to voice an opinion.
It seems that i will be one more of those 20+ million ex wow players pretty soon.