Page 17 of 63 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
27
... LastLast
  1. #321
    It's way to late for blizz to do this. I don't see how this encourages players to form 25man raids. It's a cookie to the existing 25m guilds but until they make lockouts separate again nothing will change. As a 25m raider I feel i'm being forced to go 10m if i want to raid. It's a dread finding 25m guilds that aren't already falling apart .. + you'll be paying for faction change/realm transfer without any guarantee that they stay 25m. I've experienced so myself..

  2. #322
    Quote Originally Posted by Tiwack View Post
    It's way to late for blizz to do this. I don't see how this encourages players to form 25man raids. It's a cookie to the existing 25m guilds but until they make lockouts separate again nothing will change. As a 25m raider I feel i'm being forced to go 10m if i want to raid. It's a dread finding 25m guilds that aren't already falling apart .. + you'll be paying for faction change/realm transfer without any guarantee that they stay 25m. I've experienced so myself..
    And if lockouts were separate, you'd want to do 10ms for extra loot
    Nyoro~n? (´・ω・`)
    5:2 diet? Pft!

    One year, 62kg/136lb lost. Only a little bit left...

  3. #323
    Herald of the Titans Injin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by fangless View Post
    A small percent of guilds do heroic raids, should we remove that content too?
    Yes. If your goal is making the average wow player happy.
    Wowprogress puts 37,000 MSV first boss kills, being generous and calling them all 25 man, that still is only 900k players. So, 10% of the playerbase does raids... remove that too.


    What a horrible mindset.
    What - it's a horrible mindset to give the average player of a game more what he wants rather than chucking resources at some niche players? Dont think so.
    http://secretgl.wordpress.com/

    Guild Blog for <Debonair> EU, Zenedar.

  4. #324
    The Lightbringer Grym's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Somewhere in UK where there is chicken
    Posts
    3,132
    Won't happen.

    Blizzard did not want to give higher ilvl to 25man raid (already said so in Blues)
    Blizzard did not even wanted to give 25man upgraded gear
    Blizzard decided to give 25man higher RNG for something that is also obtainable in 10s.

    Reason being is they won't want to add anything exclusive to 25man, because now the 10man raid are pretty much taking over, adding something exclusive will either cause all the 10man guilds to QQ, and made some of them go back to 25man even if they didn't enjoy it.

    Blizzard wanted to make the 10/25 purely a choice, by adding a slightly higher RNG, still a choice, because what you can obtain is still available in 10s, the moment you add something exclusive, for many people it will stop becoming a choice. Compare the amount of 25man and 10man out there, which one do you think Blizzard would want to avoid QQ from?

    Even the recent change had made some of the 10man guilds out there QQ already, can you imagine the QQ if they add something exclusive?

  5. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by Grym View Post
    Even the recent change had made some of the 10man guilds out there QQ already, can you imagine the QQ if they add something exclusive?
    And you know what, it's the wrong kind of change. Split the first kill achievements. Then we'll see who wants to play what. That's the core of the problem for many players. Loot is a good thing to bitch about, but what it boils down to is achievement listings.

  6. #326
    10m and 25m content needs to be separate at this point. 15m raids won't solve any problems. Players, like in TBC, need to learn to think for themselves instead of having content handed to them on a silver platter. Want to see it? COOPERATE WITH EACH OTHER!

    ...but wait, we don't like the other 10m guilds! We want to do it on our own!
    This is when you have to slow down on progression and gear up new recruits or pug on your own loot system. My TBC guild started out as a single Kara late-night 10m group but pugged 15 others, mostly those not in guilds or that weren't able to raid with their existing guild because of schedules but didn't want to join ours outright (surprising, eh? not back then). We had to keep running Kara to gear some pugs because they didn't have critical gear, sure, but that's how things worked and we accepted it whole-heartedly.

    Eventually we went from RRMS to a form of group-based DKP that was acknowledged and accepted by the pugs. Sure, you could still join and not have DKP and still walk away with loot because if we had to randomly pug more than our primary group we still went RRMS (and gave all attended DKP so that, if they became regulars, they would have it) but overall DKP won out. We cleared through Gruul/Mag and well into SS/Eye albeit a bit slower because we had to gear people more often. At this point, we guild-tagged everyone and made BT and eventually SWP runs as a fully-fledged guild capable of holding its own.

    My point? Cooperation is key. It might slow you down a bit and you may end up gearing more players than you intended to but you can still see the content as it comes. You need to be smart players and work with each other instead of taking the game for granted. I know it's not a job, but all of life is about learning to live with and work with other people. Why shouldn't games built around the social aspects of life be any different?
    Last edited by treehumper; 2013-01-24 at 05:48 PM.

  7. #327
    Herald of the Titans Injin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    And you know what, it's the wrong kind of change. Split the first kill achievements. Then we'll see who wants to play what. That's the core of the problem for many players. Loot is a good thing to bitch about, but what it boils down to is achievement listings.
    I don't see how something which only interests a couple of dozen people per server will change things much in 25 mans favour, really.

    Unless I am missing something? Are the 15th guild to clear content really that bothered about this kinda of thing?
    http://secretgl.wordpress.com/

    Guild Blog for <Debonair> EU, Zenedar.

  8. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Grym View Post
    Blizzard wanted to make the 10/25 purely a choice, by adding a slightly higher RNG, still a choice, because what you can obtain is still available in 10s, the moment you add something exclusive, for many people it will stop becoming a choice.
    It's funny how you talk about "choice". I'm a 25 man raider, in practice I have no choice to do 25 mans anymore because the game has no real 25 man raiding scene anymore. Thus I'm currently not playing at all. You can argue about theoretical choices to do something, but in practice the only choice is 10 mans, which makes the raiding game dull as hell.

  9. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by spectrefax View Post
    I see this posted a lot and it makes it really obvious that anyone who has posted this has never been in a management or recruitment role for a 25 man (or any) guild.

    The problem is not that they don't enjoy it enough, the problem is that, for the majority of 25 man rosters, they spend two times as much time recruiting and managing than they do raiding! Which means, if that particular 25 man guild is running 10 hours a week, it means they are recruiting/managing up to 20 hours a week.

    It's not that they don't enjoy the 25 man raiding scene, when they are raiding. It's that the massive timesink of recruiting and management is such a royal pain in the ass that it becomes less desirable to deal with without incentives. Incentives obviously make it easier to do both jobs.
    So it's only more difficult for those in an admin / officer role? Yes.... Which is what i've said all along.

    Therefore why should none officers 25 raiders get a bonus for doing the raid size they prefer compared to what a 10 raider gets?

    Surely only the officers are doing more work and therefore only they should be entitled to any extra reward. How would you implement such a reward feature though... you obviously can't just do it on guild rank beause guilds could just promote everyone upto officer rank during raids for the chance at the bonus gear or whatever special reward there was....

    I don't see what they can legitimately do but it's clear theres no reason that an ordinairy none officer 25 raider has no more extra work outside of raids compared to that of a 10 player raider. I raided 40/25 player raids from Vanilla up until mid tier 11 in what was a top 100-200 guild. Nothing I experienced required any extra effort or time on my part than I now spend raiding in my rank 550 ish 10 man guild...

    Give the officers in 25 player guilds some title which is lost upon leaving that guild / losing officer rank. It would be recognition of their rank etc without giving 25 player guilds an actual raiding / gear advantage (especially to random 25 raiders who haven't earned it any more than a 10 raider has). The same thing could be done with flavour / vanity items that would be purchaseable from the guild vendor by people with officer rank (possibly free of cost) but that would be lost upon losing officer rank....

    Give the people doing the extra work (25 player raiding guild officers) the rewards but don't just give it to everyone who happens to be in a 25 player guild..... That's just silly.
    Last edited by Paulosio; 2013-01-24 at 06:16 PM.

  10. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulosio View Post
    So it's only more difficult for those in an admin / officer role? Yes.... Which is what i've said all along.

    Therefore why should none officers 25 raiders get a bonus for doing the raid size they prefer compared to what a 10 raider gets?

    Surely only the officers are doing more work and therefore only they should be entitled to any extra reward. How would you implement such a reward feature though... you obviously can't just do it on guild rank beause guilds could just promote everyone upto officer rank during raids for the chance at the bonus gear or whatever special reward there was....

    I don't see what they can legitimately do but it's clear theres no reason that an ordinairy none officer 25 raider has no more extra work outside of raids compared to that of a 10 player raider. I raided 40/25 player raids from Vanilla up until mid tier 11 in what was a top 100-200 guild. Nothing I experienced required any extra effort or time on my part than I now spend raiding in my rank 550 ish 10 man guild...
    This is an issue in 10 mans as well on servers that have low pop (like mine). It's not unique by any means to 25 man guilds. The question is not "what do we do to compensate 25 man raiders for sticking to 25 man raiding?!?!" It's "why are people leaving 25 man raiding and/or where are they going? Are they leaving to do 10's because it's a format they prefer? Are they leaving because in reality they hate most members of the guild they were in and are going to hang with people they enjoy spending time with that they can also 10 man raid with? Are they leaving because they're getting benched too often? Are they leaving because they don't like the loot rules? Are they leaving the game entirely? Screaming at Blizzard to fix 25 man raiding is meaningless if you can't pinpoint why people are leaving. The logistical pain in the backside is on the heads of the officers and raid leaders, not the regulars that are bailing in droves.

  11. #331
    Quote Originally Posted by Injin View Post
    Yes, lets go back to 2% of the playerbase seeing the current endgame raid.
    Yes. What's the problem with that? There were more people happily playing back then than now.

  12. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by Martoshi View Post
    Yes. What's the problem with that? There were more people happily playing back then than now.
    Even if that is true (and I see no evidence that it true. Subs numbers aren't evidence) I don't think there would be more people playing happily today if suddenly 98% of people couldn't do normal mode raids.
    Last edited by Paulosio; 2013-01-24 at 07:01 PM.

  13. #333
    Quote Originally Posted by brunnor View Post
    25 man raiders were "betrayed" by swing players. Real 25man raiders still raid 25man today. Swing players go to whatever is FotM, easier, less demanding, whatever. The same can be said for 10man players. 10man raiders raided 10mans during Wrath because they liked the format over anything and they didn't care that the loot wasn't the same. Blizzard saw the horrible imbalance in it and saved the format. The exact opposite is the case today. 25mans are in the Wrath 10mans shoes. We want to raid our format no matter what and Blizzard said they want to save us like they did 10s in Wrath. Then they come with this horrible idea that won't save shit and call it our savior and people wonder why we are pissed.

    Anyway... Swing players are what Blizzard is trying to give us back. Those players that don't care what format they run, they just want what's "better".
    Most agreeable post Ive seen so far in this thread. Blizz is going to have to step on some toes if they truly want to 'save' 25 man. If not just let it die at this point so people can quit or move on.

  14. #334
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulosio View Post
    Even if that is true (and I see no evidence that it true. Subs numbers aren't evidence) I don't think there would be more people playing happily today if suddenly 98% of people couldn't normal mode raids.
    Are you saying only 2% were able to raid at all in TBC? And yes, sub numbers are evidence, by definition. Your "thinking" is not.

  15. #335
    The Lightbringer judgementofantonidas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    East Coast USA
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by Burritaco View Post
    You're playing on a 50" TV what do you expect?
    there is something wrong with his setup. NOT the size of his "monitor"

    I have an AMD PhenomII dual core, 4gig and a geoforce 560ti with a non solid state 1 terrabyte drive running 70 fps min in a 25 man setting 90 or more ten man, and 120 anywhere else on a 66" Panasonic 1080i flat screen through HDMI.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-24 at 02:04 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by joebu View Post
    Most agreeable post Ive seen so far in this thread. Blizz is going to have to step on some toes if they truly want to 'save' 25 man. If not just let it die at this point so people can quit or move on.
    If your statement were true there would be many more 25 man players, as 25 mans are still eroniously thought of as the premiere raids, when the only extra challenge is in the management not the content.





    There is no bad RNG only bad L2P

  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by judgementofantonidas View Post
    there is something wrong with his setup. NOT the size of his "monitor"

    I have an AMD PhenomII dual core, 4gig and a geoforce 560ti with a non solid state 1 terrabyte drive running 70 fps min in a 25 man setting 90 or more ten man, and 120 anywhere else on a 66" Panasonic 1080i flat screen through HDMI.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-24 at 02:04 PM ----------



    If your statement were true there would be many more 25 man players, as 25 mans are still eroniously thought of as the premiere raids, when the only extra challenge is in the management not the content.
    People seem to think the size of the screen you are playing on determines why your FPS is so low. I wouldn't even bother replying to them considering they most likely have no clue what resolution means let alone why that is the cause for low FPS in games and not the size of your monitor.

    As for raid sizes, Blizzard could save so much time trying to balance two different raid sizes and be abel to put that into design or even future patches faster by simply saying raids are one size, 10, 25 or 15. Truthfully it would have to be at LEAST 15, 20 or 25 if they want to keep their precious LFR for the bads.

  17. #337
    The Lightbringer judgementofantonidas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    East Coast USA
    Posts
    3,511
    Quote Originally Posted by alturic View Post
    People seem to think the size of the screen you are playing on determines why your FPS is so low. I wouldn't even bother replying to them considering they most likely have no clue what resolution means let alone why that is the cause for low FPS in games and not the size of your monitor.

    As for raid sizes, Blizzard could save so much time trying to balance two different raid sizes and be abel to put that into design or even future patches faster by simply saying raids are one size, 10, 25 or 15. Truthfully it would have to be at LEAST 15, 20 or 25 if they want to keep their precious LFR for the bads.
    if they are not going to make one noticably more challenging they should just choose one and if people want to raid they will comply. if they do not then they can whine that their precious LFR is full of trolls, pick herbs, or RP whatever floats their boat.





    There is no bad RNG only bad L2P

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    So... you want fair competition for the realm first feat in that either one can get it but not an actual fair competition because there is no humanly possible way to actually tune 10m and 25m the same? How does that work? Leaving all number tuning like HP, boss DPS etc. aside... how exactly do you think room size is tuned equally for 10m and 25m? Leaving EVERYTHING ELSE aside, that alone is a reason to split realm first achievements.
    Not really. Leaving everything else aside, what you are saying is that a mere change in tactics or feel is sufficient to warrant a separate achievement.

    Would you then advocate one achievement for a 25 man group using tactic A and another for a 25 man group using tactic B? Or how about a granting a new achievement because the usual raid group had to pick up some PuGs meaning you ahd to modify your normal set of tactics?

    10s and 25s can never be identical. But then, they don't have to be. The achievement doesn't (currently) recognise or care for HOW a challenge was over come...just that it was. In LK, separate achivements were awarded for the different tiers of difficulty. That is the same case now.

    And there is no way you can deny that. This isn't fair competition. One side will always feel different than the other, no matter which one has the "advantage".
    You want an achievement for playing a raid format because of the "feel"? As opposed to what it does now - recognise the first group to overcome a challenge of a particular difficulty? Maybe it will in future, but there isn't really any need for it, nor is it even certain that such a split is desireable given the potential negative ramifications.

    EJL
    Last edited by Talen; 2013-01-25 at 01:03 AM.

  19. #339
    More likely, if more "incentives" are put to make people do 25s, people are just going to quit raiding overall. My guildies feel the same - we're hardcore 10man since cata. I enjoyed 25s while they lasted, they were great, but I much, much prefer the cozyness of our 10man guild. If 25 are given any additional rewards as suggested by OP, I'd not feel motivated to play AT ALL. So no, I'd not magically start recruiting more people so we can go 25.

    At best it would stop 25man guilds who want to go 10man from going 10man.. And why would you want to do that? Let everyone enjoy what they want to enjoy.

  20. #340
    Quote Originally Posted by Talen View Post
    Not really. Leaving everything else aside, what you are saying is that a mere change in tactics or feel is sufficient to warrant a speartae achiveemnt.

    Would you then advocate one achievement for a 25 man group using tactic A and another for a 25 man group using tactic B? Or how about a granting a new achievement because the usual raid group had to pick up some PuGs meaning you ahd to modify your normal set of tactics?

    10s and 25s can never be identical. But then, they don't have to be. The achievement doesn't (currently) recognise or care for HOW a challenge was over come...just that it was. In LK, separate achivements were awarded for the different tiers of difficulty. That is the same case now.




    You want an achievement for playing a raid format because of the "feel"? As opposed to what it does now - recognise the first group to overcome a challenge of a particular difficulty? Maybe it will in future, but there isn't really any need for it, nor is it even certain that such a split is desireable given the potential negative ramifications.

    EJL
    Yes, given the different tactics required it is sufficient of a separate achivement.

Posting Permissions

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