Ghostcrawler tweet about 25 man, let the speculation begin!

[Arhippa]

No, Ultraxion didn't have a 5:30 soft enrage on 10 man any more than it did on 25 man. The damage ramped to the same proportion on both difficulties, and 25 mans definitely did not carry more healers per raider than 10 mans. Having healed both 10 and 25 H Ultraxion at 0%, if you were wiping at 5:30, you were hitting a healer skill level wall, nothing else. 25 man healers had no choice but to figure out how to play optimally and last to the enrage timer. The only reason 10 man may think 5:30 was some type of soft enrage was that it was possible to kill the boss before that point (which was nearly 100% impossible at 0% in 25 man) so the healers never learned to properly heal through to the enrage.

I said "around 5:30ish", not "exactly 5:30." Most 10mans had this soft enrage in place. And yes, in both difficulties 20% of the raid were healers. I don't know about your guild but in ours we survived purely by stacking and planning the cooldowns optimally from the 5min mark onwards. Something that 10mans simply didn't have the possibility to even try.

[Radalek]

You keep arguing that 25s require a higher personal DPS as if this is proof. What you don't seem to be acknowledging is that due to the fact that 25s have more CDs available more frequently, differences in personal uptimes on the targets, a guaranteed full load of buffs and so on that balancing around a higher personal DPS is both necessary and requires little or no extra effort on the part of the player involved.

You balance the encounter around what is there. 10s are easier to skew in your favor if you want progression because you can arrange things so you will enter with a better starting gear level earlier on, a higher personal skill level, arrange to have all the buffs covered and all CDs available and so on. And as a result, players who go that route will have an easier time. Why? Because these players aren't after a challenge. They are after the goodies.And Blizzard cannot really balance an encounter around such players because, by definition, they are exceptional and are taking advantage of an aspect that exists from simply having two size formats.

EJL

But that's exactly what I was saying. 10 mans are balanced around not having all the buffs/cds and so on. But what happens when you do? Challenge is gone (also the reason why top guilds raid 25 man, due to challenge). You can skew it in case of progression and end up with all you need. Then you see worlds best 25 man guilds fighting for their lives and wiping multiple times at 1% on bosses like Ultraxion/Gara'jal before they finally make it while their 10 man counterparts kill it with 30 seconds left on the enrage timer with no fuss at all.
In the end I wasn't using higher per person DPS in 25 man as an argument, was just trying to tell that troll Espe that it's ridiculous to claim that 10 man has tighter enrage timer. Still waiting for his answer btw.

[Speedlance]

And the square root of pi divided by the reciprocal of 10 is larger than the square root of pi divided by the reciprocal of 25, so 10s are also harder in that regard.

/makes about as much sense.

If you didn't understand all you had to do was ask
What I ment by this is that it's easier to get 8 good players out of 10 then lets say 20 out of 25, you understand now?

[Espe]

We can talk about enrage timers all day, but what it comes down to is this: do 25m guilds deserve any more incentives than they already have to raid in this format? I think not.

More battle rezes, more loot per person (which nerfs the content more quickly over time), higher likelihood that they drops will actually be able to be used, less executional responsibility per person, and an easier time adjusting to comp requirements. All of this they get for having to do slightly more logistical (i.e. outside of raid) planning - and all of this the devs admit over and over again.

I'd say it is clear that 25m raiders already have plenty of incentives. The problem lies in the current Blizzard philosophy of not letting lower pop servers merge. CRZ did not help raiding guilds, that doesn't mean we should start showering 25m guild with even more easy epics.

I'd also say there is a reason that there is no 10m version of LFR. Check my sig for more details.

[Banzhe]

LFR has nothing to do with normal or heroic Espe, which is what your signature is pointed on.., are you going to kick that old dog every time you post in a thread about content?- and more loot per boss does not mean 100% guaranteed items wanted.., in fact it often plays out to more items disenchanted even early on.

In either case, I love how most posters that do 10m have this feeling like it's the official raid size.

I would have hoped that the "incentive" GC have mentioned would be something silly like Mass Summon, or perhaps something that is appropriate like different achievements and titles again since it's three completely different worlds when it comes to different sizes.., but looking at the 10m posters who have the most ignorant perspective on everything, I hope they fucking overload on stuff for 25s now!
(Not saying it's all posters with that view, but majority in this thread are as thick as bricks, and I personally wouldn't even trust them in a scenario!)

Not long ago there was a poll on mmo about what people wanted when it came to raid size. It was even split between 10 and 25, but about 25%+ responded they wanted to do 25 instead of 10, you can put in that what you want, most that did reply as to why they voted for that option;

Because 10m is a glorified heroic dungeon group, simple as when the area you fight in is the size of fucking Stormwind including surrounding suburbs, positional requirement (or awareness) is a big part of raiding, which is non-existent in 10m!

[Radalek]

We can talk about enrage timers all day, but what it comes down to is this: do 25m guilds deserve any more incentives than they already have to raid in this format? I think not.

More battle rezes, more loot per person (which nerfs the content more quickly over time), higher likelihood that they drops will actually be able to be used, less executional responsibility per person, and an easier time adjusting to comp requirements. All of this they get for having to do slightly more logistical (i.e. outside of raid) planning - and all of this the devs admit over and over again.

I'd say it is clear that 25m raiders already have plenty of incentives. The problem lies in the current Blizzard philosophy of not letting lower pop servers merge. CRZ did not help raiding guilds, that doesn't mean we should start showering 25m guild with even more easy epics.

I'd also say there is a reason that there is no 10m version of LFR. Check my sig for more details.

Your sig is out of context, talking about LFR alone.
You have balanced number of battle rezes due to more people, bigger chances of mistakes and random deaths due to bigger damage on the raid.
There's whooping 4% more loot per person in 25 man, and that's the only incentive atm.
Slightly more? You obviously had never been in 25 man guild. And it's logistical effort both in and out of raids.

You claimed 10 man has tighter enrage timers, I came with examples showing they are not, not even near. Care to admit that at least or you will continue trolling?

[Deleted]

Note: If you have never really raided 25 man (Doing weekly heroic mode progression) with a decent guild group, then you can't tell which is harder then the other, therefore your arguements are invalid, since you have 0 exp.


Difficulty: This depends from fight to fight. I know for example, Ultraxion, Zon'ozz, and Spine of DW were harder on 25 man, while Hagara and Madness were harder on 10 man.


Players Dieing: There is no difference here imo. Yes, losing 1 player in 10 man is worse then losing a person in 25 man.

But alot of you forget that you actually have 25 players in a 25 man, this means that you need to coordiante and rely on more players + you have less space/player = More chance of players making a mistake = more chance on fails = more chance of people dieing.

If we look at this statisically and let's say 1 players dies/5 players. -> 2 dead players in 10 man -> 5 dead players in 25man. When you lose this much in 25 man (assuming it's progress) It's gg, when healers die, the other healers can't keep up, when a tank dies it's gg, and when the DPS dies you won't make the enrage timer. Same goes for 10 man when you lose 2 players.


Organisation: I think we can all agree that it's easier to run a 10 man, then a 25 man. Let's just say you want to start your own guild, you're most likely going to create a 10 man, because it's alot easier to find enough players for a skilled 10 man then for an equally skilled 25. You need to have more backups for 25man, more drama can ensue between 25 different people,....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I honestly believe 25 man needs something extra. Players tend to join 10 mans, because a 10 man guild is just easier to find (agreed, there are players who do preffer 10 man over 25). I'm pretty much forced to do 10 mans since there is one 25 man guild on my realm, and they compete for world ranks, which is to hardcore for my schedual. When people have more incentive to raid 25 mans, the 25 man guilds will be more succesfull (more skilled players apply) and we'll see more 25 man guilds being formed. If this change is good and controversial, I'm pretty sure we'll see some changes in the raiding landscape, I'm excited about it.


I hope (but I doubt it) they make some raids 25 man only, kinda like in Vanilla and TBC. They'd have a main raid, which would be accesible by 10 and 25 man, and then a smaller one (maybe like 3 bosses) for 25 man.
The 10 man's would QQ, which is understandable, but then I hope blizzard has the balls to say "If you want to see the 25 man content, try LFR"

PS: The reason why they made LFR 25 man is not because 25 man is easier, but it's because you only need 2 tanks (which are more rare then DPS and arguably healers) for 23 people, istead of 2 tanks for 8 people.

[katta]

I'd also say there is a reason that there is no 10m version of LFR. Check my sig for more details.

There are a few reasons why there is no 10 man LFR. It allows for shorter Que times and allows more DPS to get into the raid. Just imagine how long the times would be if 50% of the group was healers and tanks. You would be waiting over an hour to get it. It allows bads to have a better chance to hide and not get noticed and therefor allowing them to complete it also.

LFR is not 25 man only because its a easier size.

Yes 25 mans get more battle rezzes but and it could be an advantage in certain cases. Just think you can rez a tank that dies 3 times to get the kill but just realize that if your tank is dying that often then most likely you wont be killing it with those 3 rezes. The reason its 3 is because there are better odds that people will die from spread,stack aoe abilities than in a 10 man. In a 10 man you can have 5 or 6 ranged that can make a small circle and not be near anyone else and have a short distance to colapse. In a 25 man you have to have 2 layers of circle which will mean that its a longer distance and time to colapse and strad out again. Then take melee that needs to be spread out. in 10 man the melee can spread out an attack the boss without being close to anyone, in 25 man you are still close to 1-2 people so that would be more unavoidable damage than in a 10 man.

More loot per person? People always believe this but its actually not true. Yes there is a better chance that loot from early boss kills will be used and not DE'ed like in a 10 man but the more kills you get the more it favors 10 man. The only people that gear super fast in a 25 man are the tanks.

Less responsibility? OK lets take nef as an example. In 10 man you can assign one person to get every interupt so all he has to do is interupt and if one goes through you know exactly who messed up. Now in 25 man you have to have 2 people interupting. We dont just say ok just interupt him when he cast and not worry about it. YOu have to assign people to take turns so those player have to remember the rotation number they are in since they are not doing every one. That actually take more responsibilty doesnt it? When you switch to adds in 10 man its easy to see who isnt DPS the right target, in a 25 man its alot harder to see who isnt DPSing the correct target so you are giving each player more responsibility to do what he is suppost to do. SO you can actually say that in a 10 man players have less individual responsibility because its easier for the raid leader to notice problems.

Easier time adjusting to comp requirements? No not every 25 man has 18 druids to take to a boss. The reason some guilds have to stack in 25 mans to get early kills is because they have to find max out DPS to kill them where as in a 10 man you dont have to always max out DPS to get early kills. Believe me if they were not hitting enrages and still being 5% short on DPS while doing almost everything exactly the way needed then they wouldnt stack classes. 25 mans dont want to stack classes but they will do what they have to do to get kills, unlike most 10 masn that would rather just cry nerf instead of doing the same thing. Just think if a 10 man guild stacked 7 druids on nef how many would have gotten kills quicker.

25 mans have no incentives. The people doing 25 mans are the people that enjoy doing them. The problem is that some people want to raid 25 mans but are unable to because everyones going to the easier 10 mans where they dont have to deal with all the issues involved in a 25 man.

---------- Post added 2013-01-13 at 08:34 AM ----------

key points:


(1)* 25mans are harder to manage for guild leaders
(2)* avarage skill in each guild are signifcantly lower in 25 then 10 due to being more in numbers.
(3)* certain fights are easier or harder on 25 due to various reasons.
(4)* harder to have substitutes in 10man guilds
(5)* loot is similar and not enough reward in 25 to make up for the work (accepted world firsts is not a valid reason lol)

(6)Blizzard solution which be based on those facts that we all know. I assume a fix to the problem would bring 25man down to 20 to get more easy comparissons between the 2 types of raid sizes, it would close the gap.

(7)Another solution which totally contradict blizzards "bring the player not the class" philosophy is to limit the number of each class you can bring.For 10man the limit could be 2 for 25 it could be 3-4.

You could also splitt them again but in another way. keep the raid sizes but have 2 completely different raids for each size with different loot and tiers and if you do one you can't do the other as you get saved to both when you do one, but 1 will be 25 man only and the other 10 man only, related theme but 2 different parts of the lore of the place, also if you get achievements for 1 dungeon you can never ever get it for the next dungeon as this achievement "table" will be activated the first time you enter the dungeon.
I don't think you can have these 2 raid sizes and do the same content and not have arguements and one side being favorable, you need to make it a real choice not a easy way out.
I know like 0.01% want to see everything in the game but a small price to pay for the greater good.

(1) Will agree with you

(2) Actually there is no proof of this at all. Actually if you think about it they should have a higher skill average because in 25 mans there is more of a chance to have someone wanting to take your spot. Most 10 mans dont run with backups so they dont have to worry about losing their raid spot.

(3) Will again agree, but will say most of the fights are harder on 25 mans but there are a few that are easier.

(4) Not actually true. Its not harder to have subs, its just that you dont need to have any. IF you need someone you just goto trade chat and pug someone.

(5) I personally dont think loot is the answer.

(6) This wouldnt fix the problem, we dont want 25 mans removed. Your proposale is doing that.

(7) What would this do besides limiting classes in raids?

[Tiberria]

I said "around 5:30ish", not "exactly 5:30." Most 10mans had this soft enrage in place. And yes, in both difficulties 20% of the raid were healers. I don't know about your guild but in ours we survived purely by stacking and planning the cooldowns optimally from the 5min mark onwards. Something that 10mans simply didn't have the possibility to even try.

The 5:30 enrage in 10 man was a myth - it was 100% reliant on healer skill. Many 25 man used 4 healers for progression at 0%, and at least 1 Holy Paladin solo healed 25H before it went to 5%, so I don't buy the argument. The 5:30 soft enrage only existed if your healers didn't have the skill to handle the fight.

[Deleted]

10 man raiders should get down from their high horses and accept the fact that people prefer 10 man because it's overall the easier choise.

[Espe]

10 man raiders should get down from their high horses and accept the fact that people prefer 10 man because it's overall the easier choise.

Not according to the devs. According to them, the only thing that might be harder for 25m is the organizational requirements outside of raid.

Seems like maybe 25m raiders need to come down off of their high horses and realize that it takes much, much less executional responsibility per person in 25m. Even the devs admit that.

There is a reason they made LFR 25m and not 10m. Check my sig for more details.

[Radalek]

Not according to the devs. According to them, the only thing that might be harder for 25m is the organizational requirements outside of raid.

Seems like maybe 25m raiders need to come down off of their high horses and realize that it takes much, much less executional responsibility per person in 25m. Even the devs admit that.

There is a reason they made LFR 25m and not 10m. Check my sig for more details.

No, that is an outright lie. They never ever said that. Your sig is taken out of context and was talking about LFR only.

You keep repeating executional responsibility crap but if you ever tried to kill any harder 25 man hc boss you would know that's not the case. On any harder 25 man boss you lose one man, make one mistake and it's game over. Same goes for 10 man as well but logistical issues organizing 25 man people in the raid are not nearly the same.

[Deleted]

Not according to the devs. According to them, the only thing that might be harder for 25m is the organizational requirements outside of raid.

Seems like maybe 25m raiders need to come down off of their high horses and realize that it takes much, much less executional responsibility per person in 25m. Even the devs admit that.

There is a reason they made LFR 25m and not 10m. Check my sig for more details.

You are pretty delusional. What your saying can somehow be applied to normal mode and LFR but absolutely noone cares about them. Heroic mode is what matters and pretty much every aspect of raiding is harder on 25 man heroic. You cannot have players dying on 25 man heroic or carry slackers, it's pure bullshit.

[Radalek]

Here's a developer quote:
"25-player raiding is more complex on a macro level (more moving pieces). Even perfect tuning doesn't compensate for the logistical difficulties.

http://blue.mmo-champion.com/topic/2...5-man-raiding/

[Deleted]

No, that is an outright lie. They never ever said that. Your sig is taken out of context and was talking about LFR only.

You keep repeating executional responsibility crap but if you ever tried to kill any harder 25 man hc boss you would know that's not the case. On any harder 25 man boss you lose one man, make one mistake and it's game over. Same goes for 10 man as well but logistical issues organizing 25 man people in the raid are not nearly the same.

Losing one man in 25 man = wipe isn't true now and it wasn't true in cata either. Both Vodka and Method had deaths on their first Gara'jal kills for example and they still managed to kill him. You can check their videos on youtube if you dont belive it.
It's also funny how the guy in Blood Legions world first Protectors movie was dpsing the wrong target for over a minute, could you get away with such a stupid misstake in 10man? Not a chance.

[Radalek]

Losing one man in 25 man = wipe isn't true now and it wasn't true in cata either. Both Vodka and Method had deaths on their first Gara'jal kills for example and they still managed to kill him. You can check their videos on youtube if you dont belive it.
It's also funny how the guy in Blood Legions world first Protectors movie was dpsing the wrong target for over a minute, could you get away with such a stupid misstake in 10man? Not a chance.

Really? Take a look at Paragon Will heroic world first kill. They lost 2 people and didn't bother to record a kill at first and then the boss just died. Took them total of 18 tries or something. They killed Gara'jal after losing a person as well with 20+ seconds left on enrage. Every single first 25 man kill was at the last possible second.

[Marooned]

Losing one man in 25 man = wipe isn't true now and it wasn't true in cata either. Both Vodka and Method had deaths on their first Gara'jal kills for example and they still managed to kill him. You can check their videos on youtube if you dont belive it.
It's also funny how the guy in Blood Legions world first Protectors movie was dpsing the wrong target for over a minute, could you get away with such a stupid misstake in 10man? Not a chance.

Check world first Paragon 10man Will of the Emperor-Heroic, they also had dead people and managed to finish it. And that was a world first!! on the very first week those heroics were available!!

But Anyways I prefer not to talk about world first race and talk about people like us who raid for fun, challenge and etc. Both 10m and 25m raids are really hard, but the effort of managing a guild with 25 active raiders needs some more incentives which honestly 10% or 20% better chance on receiving loot is not enough. Everyone gets geared up raiding regularly relatively fast, so lootwise I think quality (ilvl??, rare mounts??) matters not quantity.

[Wildtree]

You guys seriously try to bring in the worlds best raiders into your arguments about 10 vs 25. which the OP said to leave out, and focus on 25 only?

What the Worlds 10 best guilds do has zero value compared to the mainstream of the raiders.
Those 10 guilds are the ones that make the guides and videos for the masses to re-enact and kill anything too, no matter what raid format.

[yazhi]

I would like to believe they will implement cauldron again for 25s, mass summon, no res timer on mass rez, etc like perks only, instead of ilvl or tittles mounts etc. I believe 25 man players would agree with me that those 3 perks are really necesary for 25 man.

BTW espe your sig and your posts are retarded period

[Deleted]

Really? Take a look at Paragon Will heroic world first kill. They lost 2 people and didn't bother to record a kill at first and then the boss just died. Took them total of 18 tries or something. They killed Gara'jal after losing a person as well with 20+ seconds left on enrage. Every single first 25 man kill was at the last possible second.

To be fair you said in an earlier post and I quote "There's more executional responsibility on any hard 25 man heroic boss. You can't afford a single mistake or death, if you do you're gone just as same as on 10 man.", not a single mistake... well that is not true now is it. ^^ Not to say that you cant afford it in 10man because sometimes you can manage it even tho it becomes alot harder than if a single player would have died in a 25man environment.