Blizzard will let 25 mans die?

[Keoren]

I don't. That effect simply emphasises a difference that is not suppseod to exist and whcih should, at best, be minimal. There is nothing to be gained by drawing attention to such differences, especially becasue it emans one version will be seen as superior and people will simply raid to get that achievement.

That is just idealistic and will never work out. It is too hard to balance the two formats acceptably.
What is to be gained is to help the people wanting to raid a struggling format to actually raid it.

Providing the incentive of a new achievement in order to attract people to a certain raid format is NOT what Blizzard apparently want to do. You can argue the achievement doesn't affect gameplay, but it is still a reward in its own right.

You seem to misunderstand me completely. It is not a new achievement. It is the same achievement with the tag changed depending on your kill.

While I support and enjoy the existence of two formats, 10- and 25-man should not be part of the same race due to the difficulties in balancing them. The amount of guilds that I have witnessed first hand going the smaller size simply to protect their ranking, and to ensure that their guild will live to the next tier, is huge. It should be possible for guilds to raid the format they want without having to ask themselves whether they should change in order to remain competitive - because the competition should be happening within the sizes. I would also dislike the current model even if the situation was the complete opposite.

You keep arguing that it is the choice of the community. That doesn't mean it is done without pressuring.

You also argue that Blizzard intends to keep on pretending that the two are identical. I will argue against them. To me, it is a bad decision and not the only one of its kind.

[Deleted]

That is just idealistic and will never work out. It is too hard to balance the two formats acceptably.
What is to be gained is to help the people wanting to raid a struggling format to actually raid it.

How can you say that? It is working already!!!
In his mind...

While I support and enjoy the existence of two format, 10- and 25-man should not be part of the same race due to the difficulties in balancing them. The amount of guilds that I have witnessed first hand going the smaller size simply to protect their ranking, and to ensure that their guild will live to the next tier, is phenomenal. It should be possible for guilds to raid the format they want without having to ask themselves whether they should change in order to remain competitive - because the competition should be happening within the sizes. I would also dislike the current model even if the situation was the complete opposite.

I don't enjoy and i don't support 10 and 25, especially in their current state.
There is no purpose of existance for them and it is rather a reason for people to quarrel!
Seperate achievements should be a self understandable seperation for everybody that is not...Talen. He will never grasp the difference between "forced" and "motivated" and complex meanings like the term "choice", so you better give up trying.
Still 10 and 25 don't click well together, they caused a different set of problems for 3 expansions in a row.
A 10/20, 12/24. 15/30 would work infinately better.
With current model criteria's there is no point for dual size. 12, 15, 18 or 20 and thats it! Going to one size atm is more importand than the size itself!!!

You keep arguing that it is the choice of the community. That doesn't mean it is done without pressuring.

Again, "choice" in his dictionary has a different meaning, pointless to try to convince him otherwise.

You also argue that Blizzard intends to keep on pretending that the two are identical. I will argue against them. To me, it is a bad decision and not the only one of its kind.

Yep, they intend to keep on pretending. I strongly suggest to agrue against them but not to insist on this 10/25 model at any form (regarding loot/achivements/tittles/locks/vanity items).
No matter what they will go for, 10 and 25 will not work well.

[Talen]

That is just idealistic and will never work out. It is too hard to balance the two formats acceptably.

Except Blizzard have succeeded in catclysm in many...not all...encounters. You may disagree, you probvably do disagree....but my opinion is that they have generally succeeded. Therefore, it is not idealistic to suggest that this will likely continue.

What is to be gained is to help the people wanting to raid a struggling format to actually raid it.

By breaking Blizzards policies

You seem to misunderstand me completely. It is not a new achievement. It is the same achievement with the tag changed depending on your kill.

No. I don't misumnderstand you. I know exactly what you are syaing.

BUT...either you provide one achievement with a different kill tag oer you provide two achieveemtns, one for each format.

NEITHER will work. With the latter, people will simply go after both. With the former, one will be seen as having more prestige and value and people will go after that. Either way, the idea doesn't work and its value lies only in that, as a reward, it doesn't directly affect gameplay.

While I support and enjoy the existence of two formats, 10- and 25-man should not be part of the same race due to the difficulties in balancing them.

The difficulties in balancing them, as far as Blizzard should be concerned, lies only in ensuring a fair equalisation of the ffort involved. Its done that, albeit not perfectly. This "race" you mention, however, is not something Blizzard should balance or design around.

The amount of guilds that I have witnessed first hand going the smaller size simply to protect their ranking, and to ensure that their guild will live to the next tier, is huge.

And yet we have a fair handful of people on this thread stating the demand for 25s is huge. Where are they then if there are raid groups crying out for them? Willing to give them a chance? They voted with their feet and went to 10s.

I would also dislike the current model even if the situation was the complete opposite.

You just stated you support the existence of two formats.

You keep arguing that it is the choice of the community. That doesn't mean it is done without pressuring.

True...it doesn't. In this case the pressure from Blizzard is....what? Raid 10s or else? No. The pressure form Blizzard is non-existant. Its "raid whatever format you want, but we won't help you recruit others. YOU have to persuade them yourselves."

Blizzard is not and should not dictate what format you raid, or who you raid with.

You also argue that Blizzard intends to keep on pretending that the two are identical. I will argue against them. To me, it is a bad decision and not the only one of its kind.

They're not identical. But close enough to make any distinction largely irrelevant given Blizzards desire to equalise the rewards between the formats.

There is no purpose of existance for them and it is rather a reason for people to quarrel!

People will always quarrel. They always have. As for the purpose of existance...some people like raiding 10s, some like raiding 25s. That alone should justify the existence of the raid format. Is there a better solution? Yes..a single raid size, but right now there would be issues with moving into that system. As it is, people like both so Blizzard offers both.

Seperate achievements should be a self understandable seperation for everybody that is not...Talen. He will never grasp the difference between "forced" and "motivated" and complex meanings like the term "choice", so you better give up trying.

Blizzards current policy can be expressed as equal rewards for equal effort. I fail to see any benefit in having them break this policy for a reward of any sort.

Again, "choice" in his dictionary has a different meaning, pointless to try to convince him otherwise.

I have yet to see any coherent argument that shows that Blizzard is strongarming anyone into running 10s. None. The people who like 25s simply are arguing that they can't run their prefferred format because there aren't enough players to form the group.

The fact that there aren't enough players to form 25s is neither Blizzards fault, nor their responsibility. Players do have a choice, and they chose 10s. Yes...convenience is a strong factor for that choice, and yet I cannot see how convenience is a bad thing.

25s have no special right to exist. They have no special call to be supported. There is no widespread call for that format to be foisted upon the players whether they want it or not.

Blizzard has provided a raid model where players aren't obligated to run multiple times to keep up progression or help their guild. They have provided a raid model where guilds aren't as beholden to schedules or players. They have provided a model where upscaling and downscaling to access certain content isn't a major issue. Its provided an increased level of flexibility to switch between raids and formats.

And I don't see anything at all that is "bad" with these aims and achievements. "Can't form 25s" is a concern...but not a major one.

And yet, somehow the fact players ghave chosen en masse to switch to 10s is somehow anatehma to a certain subset of players. Its somehow bad that players aren't obligated to raid several times a week. Its terrible that guilds don't have to up/downscale to access content. Locking guilds out of content for a week while their tank was on vacation was somehow a good thing. And isn't it simply awful how players dion't need to schedule their life around a game anymore?

EJL

[Keoren]

NEITHER will work. With the latter, people will simply go after both. With the former, one will be seen as having more prestige and value and people will go after that. Either way, the idea doesn't work and its value lies only in that, as a reward, it doesn't directly affect gameplay.

And the problem is? This prestige value will be for the format they actually want to raid, not solely for the one that will provide them with the best gain (progression etc.). There is nothing wrong with acknowledging the differences.

It would even allow for more possibilities in the creation of the encounters since the frames would be more lenient. While aiming for the balance would a goal, it wouldn't be a necessity. Not like it's exactly working out perfectly right now.

You just stated you support the existence of two formats.

Do you intentionally nitpick when you should very well know what I mean? I support 10 and 25 both existing, but not the current model. It's almost as if you're intentionally trying to misunderstand everything that I'm saying.

Yes, I also do disagree with them having been successful with the model as it is now. It is quite obvious to me.

True...it doesn't. In this case the pressure from Blizzard is....what? Raid 10s or else? No. The pressure form Blizzard is non-existant. Its "raid whatever format you want, but we won't help you recruit others. YOU have to persuade them yourselves."

This pressure is the lack of progression and other disadvantages compared to the possibilities of the alternative format. While indirect, it very well exists. It is born from the community.

Similarly an exploit that goes unpunished does pressure people into using it if it gives an advantage. Everyone else will be doing so, in which case damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[Deleted]

The fact that there aren't enough players to form 25s is neither Blizzards fault, nor their responsibility. Players do have a choice, and they chose 10s. Yes...convenience is a strong factor for that choice, and yet I cannot see how convenience is a bad thing.

When you have a biased system that treats the
Easy to Create
Easy to maintain
Easy to organize
With high uptime in raids due to less DCs faster regrouping after wipes, less afks
Low waiting times "to raid"

in the same way with the
Hard to create
Hard to maintain
Hard to organize
With low uptime in raids due to more Dcs slower regrouping after wipes, more afks

Then the people will naturally gravitate to the first size for reasons that have nothing to do with personal preference!
Those things have nothing to do with the raiding encounter, yet, they force people to go for 10.
This is bias, how hard it is to grasp it? Very i guess...

25s have no special right to exist. They have no special call to be supported. There is no widespread call for that format to be foisted upon the players whether they want it or not.

25=/=10, that by definition means that they cannot be treated the same. Quite simple, yet, you are acting as if different is the same and in a rather theatrical way you state "25s has no special right to exist". Who told you that they have special right to exist???
What they do have and do NOT get, is AN EQUAL chance to exist with 10, in the CURRENT BIASED MODEL!

Blizzard has provided a raid model where players aren't obligated to run multiple times to keep up progression or help their guild. They have provided a raid model where guilds aren't as beholden to schedules or players. They have provided a model where upscaling and downscaling to access certain content isn't a major issue. Its provided an increased level of flexibility to switch between raids and formats.

Blizzard has provided a model that makes people gravitate towards 10
Blizzard has provided a model that acts like parental control to people, limiting the choices of those that WANT to enjoy both offered formats
Blizzard has provided a model that offers no immersion in a raid. You can beat up the boss in 10 and in 25. You can beat him in easy normal and heroic mode. The boss is not an entity in the game since TBC and the game is more like a platform game right now and less of an RPG game.

And I don't see anything at all that is "bad" with these aims and achievements. "Can't form 25s" is a concern...but not a major one.

For you maybe, for others maybe not.
When you re forced to raid 10 the system is bad.
If you have a problem understanding this, you are the one that has the problem and not the rest of the posters. At least understand that...

And yet, somehow the fact players ghave chosen en masse to switch to 10s is somehow anatehma to a certain subset of players. Its somehow bad that players aren't obligated to raid several times a week. Its terrible that guilds don't have to up/downscale to access content. Locking guilds out of content for a week while their tank was on vacation was somehow a good thing. And isn't it simply awful how players dion't need to schedule their life around a game anymore?

EJL

Again, your problem to understand what defines a "choice", popped up like a mashroom in the middle of a serious discussion!

The problem with your logic, is that the issue '25 people are dying" is raised by people that are FORCED into doing 10s mainly!!!
It is not an "anathema" towards the people that are going 10 en masse, by 25 man raiders, it is PEOPLE THAT RAID 10 that have the issue!!! GOT IT???

[Yumisara]

At least there isn't 40 man current raids anymore.

But in serious-ness. 25 Man isn't "seriously" dying. Raiding in general is dying, kinda due to the change they did back in Wrath, making 10 and 25 man Lock-out the same. (The good old days...)
Throughout Cataclysm, I have experienced both 10 and 25 man progression. And throughout Wrath. And both have their serious downsides. 25 Man, there can be more retards. 10 Man can sometimes be harder, and there is less loot than 25 man.

So what? Big deal. You, as a player, decides what they want to raid. My guild does both, we have one group running 25 mans, and the other running 10 mans. Both are appealing to me as a raid setup. If you like 25 Man more, by all means, same thing for 10 man. The only thing that Blizzard does is make the raid, separate the difficulty between 10 and 25. And the loot table overall. Its up to you what you do, not Blizzard.

[Tzalix]

So we're after the press tour.I was looking forward to only one thing: Don't let 25 mans die.
It seems like Blizzard doesn't have any plans to do that and things gonna stay as they are now.

So, because they didn't mention 25 mans, it means they're gonna die?

They didn't mention me either, does that mean I'm going to die?

[Teck12]

25 mans naturally require more organization and whenever you kill something with 25 people, it just gives you a larger feeling of accomplishment because you managed to get 25 decent raiders to work together; this is why some people prefer 25 over 10.

The only advantage to 10 that I see is that it's way easier to acquire 10 people.

Edit: My opinion is to go back to how things were around the ulduar times. It was very nice to see a lot of gear variety too

[Donthealme]

Talen what have you raided and killed while current content? Honestly the more I read the more it seems like you are a player they made LFR for so that you could see the content.

[fogel]

25=/=10, that by definition means that they cannot be treated the same. Quite simple, yet, you are acting as if different is the same and in a rather theatrical way you state "25s has no special right to exist". Who told you that they have special right to exist???
What they do have and do NOT get, is AN EQUAL chance to exist with 10, in the CURRENT BIASED MODEL!

You pointed out above, that they in fact do have an equal chance to exist. The players are free to choose. This is not biased in any way.
One could consider it as a kind of "natural selection". Having equal conditions, 10 seems to be much more popular with the "raiding nature" than 25.

[Deleted]

No, it can't. You don't meet your own criteria #1 in that poll, as it is not a representative cluster of all MMO-C readers. It represents only the subset of forum-goers who visit Raids & Dungeons.

On the contrary, it actually matches perfectly well the mmo-champion userbase. Polls always have their target audience and that's why the poll should always be asked only from the target audience. So any mmo-champion user who also raids should be part of this subset going to Raids & Dungeons. If the poll was in any other section it would have wrong voters skewing the results.

In a same sense if Toyota wanted to make a poll about what optional feature they should include in their car models they wouldn't go to bicycleforum to ask it nor should they go to middleschool or even streets. They would be best to ask it in some car community or even better yet, toyota community where the users know the premises of the situation. Otherwise the result could be screens and dvd player at the back seat (middleschool) or integrated bicycle rack (bicycleforum) when the actual drivers wanted automatic transmission or parking helper.

By the very nature of polls the results gotten from official forums and ingame would be nearly identical as long as they also had corrent target audience (raids subsection or ingame inside raids, excluding lfr).

[AeneasBK]

You pointed out above, that they in fact do have an equal chance to exist. The players are free to choose. This is not biased in any way.
One could consider it as a kind of "natural selection". Having equal conditions, 10 seems to be much more popular with the "raiding nature" than 25.

Another post from someone who clearly hasn't experienced the difference between organising 10 mans and organising 25 mans.

If they made a 5 man format for seeing raid content, 10 man guilds would disappear at the same rate.

[Bendder]

Imagine what it was like to have to organize 72 people.. or 54 people in order to raid, and do it 3-4 times a week... That was the life of an Everquest Guild Leader. Man I don't miss those days at all.

[fogel]

Another post from someone who clearly hasn't experienced the difference between organising 10 mans and organising 25 mans.

If they made a 5 man format for seeing raid content, 10 man guilds would disappear at the same rate.

I am a former guild and raid lead of a 25 man guild. So I would say that I am quite used to the differences in organisation.

Giving incentives for a format the majority of raiders does not prefer seems not right to me. I enjoyed getting better loot, but it simply was not fair. There are no gameplay advantages by running 10s compared to running 25s. The people have kind of spoken. They like 10s more.

[Donthealme]

There are no gameplay advantages by running 10s compared to running 25s

This is why anything you said is null and void. There are gameplay advantages it is 100% undeniable, if you don't think so go to youtube, watch Paragons world first 25 man Al'akir kill, then watch a 10 man that is a clear gameplay advantage. I won't even get into other fights, but they exist for both(beth'tilac HC on 25 had gameplay advantages if you didnt have a hunter on 10). People really need to stop with they are equal crap they are not and I could give so many reasons, but it's useless because people do not understand that. There are multiple encounters from each tier that favors one raid size or another, due to that they are not equal.
As far as the people speaking? Yeah they have to the tune of 2 million less subscribers due to this shit raid model.

[fogel]

As far as the people speaking? Yeah they have to the tune of 2 million less subscribers due to this shit raid model.

So 2 million people quit because 25s were no longer better geared?

That would be around 40-50000 raid guilds.

[Donthealme]

So 2 million people quit because 25s were no longer better geared?

Again you prove that what you say is invalid and that you really don't read what has been said 919384920 in this thread that people give zero fucks about the gear, those who Blizzard makes Hard modes for do not care about gear, it's a simple tool and nothing else. The lack of new subscriptions is the largest reason of the loss, that is 100% common sense, people conintued to start playing because of Illidan and Arthas, they do not have the WC3 crowd anymore to appeal too.

The largest change in cata was the raid model, the majority of the wow population raids....now put two and two together, and do not say it is a lack of content, every tier of raiding this xpac was better than t7 and t9 by far.

Now to Talen who says people left because of content
Wotlk had 12 dungeons at launch, these dungeons were easily completed on Heroic mode in 30 minutes(or less in some cases)
Cata had 9 at launch, these dungeons easily took 35-40 minutes on launch or even longer
T11 is one of the best tiers of content Blizzard has released, T7 had 2 new bosses and a completely reused raid
Cata added Rated Battle grounds
Cata added two new BGs
Wotlk added one at launch

Clearly cata had better end game at launch, now Ulduar was much better than Firelands, but the largest subscriber dip was in T11.

[fogel]

The largest change in cata was the raid model, the majority of the wow population raids....now put two and two together, and do not say it is a lack of content, every tier of raiding this xpac was better than t7 and t9 by far.

Please provide numbers that back your claim that the majority of subscribers raids. And - while you're at it -provide numbers, that the majority of subscribers raided 25s. Because, that's why they left, right?

As to what umptythreeth bajillion people say in this thread:

Saying something often does not prove that it is right.

[Donthealme]

143,592 guilds killed normal mode Marrowgar
71,186 guilds killed normal mode Magmaw
62,571 guilds killed normal Shannox
57,701 guilds killed normal Morchok

65,891 less guilds killed Morchok now this number is not absolute because there is obviously some overlap of guilds going 10 or 25 man etc
59,356 guilds killed Normal mode Marrowgar on 25 man.
More 25 man guilds killed Marrowgar than 10 and 25 man guilds combined have killed Morchok.....there are your numbers.\

If the majority of the wow population didnt raid would they have 5 different versions of each raid? They have said so many times that the largest percentage of players raid in some form.

All many people keep saying is no thats not the reason, if it wasnt the raid model why did subscriptions fall off massively AFTER cata launched?

[fogel]

I got one more question:

Do you think 25 guilds used to be more progress-oriented than 10man guilds?

Apart from that:

60k*30+85k*10=1,800,000+850,000=2,650,000=2.65 million people (roughly estimated) killed nomal Marrowgar. This is not the majority.

Furthermore:
60k < 85k. So there were more 10man kills than 25man kills. Which is a really good number to back up, that 10s were more populare even when 25s got more and better loot, as well as separate achievements etc.