Do you approve of the 10/25 Shared lockout/difficulty now?

[Findinnan]

I liked being able to pug 10man's to gear all my alts and run 25's with my guild or run GDKP's.

[rpdrichard]

Hate the shared lockout. My 10s were my drinking/have fun on the weekend raid.. and 25s were guild progression.. Now... I do LFR and that is it. No normal or fun raiding for me anymore.

Agree with this

[Ashvael]

I'm somewhat surprised by the poll numbers. I had thought that a lot more 10m players (which is the majority) would like the same loot/achievements.

I prefer the old system as well. I used to have fun in 10m which can now only be done on alts.

[Knownix]

I'm somewhat surprised by the poll numbers. I had thought that a lot more 10m players (which is the majority) would like the same loot/achievements.

I prefer the old system as well. I used to have fun in 10m which can now only be done on alts.

I am too surprised by the votes, but I guess It was neat to have the extra lockout to pug.. but I guess that's what LFR replaced

[Xami]

I really don't mind, but I'd like the style where 25 and 10 were different instances, like TBC. Having LFR solves the original issue that Blizz tried to solve with 25/10 same-raid system.

[ComputerNerd]

I agree with the shared lockout.
Still large parts of the community are too damn ignorant to accept why it came in the first place.

While burnout was often quoted, that was I feel only part of it.
The other part was fairness, in that the numbers in a guild should not alone dictate loot gains.
Smaller guilds unable to raid 25m content were at a huge disadvantage, but that seems to have gone ignored by those who used the 25m content to artificially inflate their 10m progress, and so leaving those smaller guilds behind.
They were cheating their progress rather than earning it.

Raid finder and the seperate lockouts is unfortunatly a big screw up by blizzard which takes a big step back.

[Rolard]

I think the lockouts should be different, but they should keep the VP cap the same, and follow the LFR policy on loot. If you loot a boss on 10 man, you can't loot that boss on 25, and vice versa. This way people who just love to raid for the sake of it can raid, and no one feels obligated to do 2 lockouts a week to stay competitive.

[obscurede]

It is the act of combining the lockouts for 10 and 25mans that led to the decline of 25 man raids. I want it back tbh. I want to have farm raids with other members of our guild. Also We should be given an option to downgrade/upgrade a lockout to 10/25 man.

[Baphomette]

Shared difficulty is one of the best things Cata brought. 10-man heroics were either tuned for people in 10N gear (and steamrolled by people in 25N), or tuned for people in 25N gear and wall-bangingly hard for people in 10N. It was not fun to work harder for less reward. LK10 dropping a 2H weapon worse than Marrowgar 25 was one of the most egregious examples I can think of.

I do wish the old raids without unified loot weren't on a shared lockout, though, it would be nice to have more retro runs available.

[Fiana]

At first I sought "could be a good idea for all the guilds who can't get 25 players to raid".

Initially it was not a bad idea.

But as usual blizzard screwed up even good ideas.

10man is easier than 25man.
10man drops more gear per player than 25man
10man drops more mounts per player than 25man
10man drops more legendaries per player than 25man

I'm not even talking about learning curve and guild management difficulty.

They left players no single reason to run 25man.

25man raiding is dying and its not shared lockout fault, its blizzards fault that they were not able to make both difficulties equally attractive.

[Deleted]

I really don't mind, but I'd like the style where 25 and 10 were different instances, like TBC. Having LFR solves the original issue that Blizz tried to solve with 25/10 same-raid system.

It does not m8.
Puging with people of your realm in a raid not a loot pinnata, was much more social and much more fun. The drawback was that you had to wait for a pug to form sometimes even for an hour.
People seem to forget that 20 minutes queue is not unusual in LFR too if you re not a healer, or with a healer.
The time waiting for the pug to form, could be fun as well, since you were already grouped and could interact with others.

What excactly LFR offers to you if you join alone?
Loot.
And some fun similar to the one you get when you hit the training dummy to check your new gear's impact on dps.

All that remains, is that blizzard deleted the easy mode that used to be the 10 man normals.
Easy mode by no means ment what LFR brought to the game. Just meant more accessible.

LFR means "press button to roll", which is disgracefull for the game.

[jace5869]

Smaller guilds were forced to actually try to recruit people..whats wrong with that? Either be content with only running 10mans or get out there and bust ass and recruit people for real content.

[Deathdawning]

I preferred it the old way, when I could do 25 guild runs and 10's for extra gear / improve on tactics / tipsy Friday night fun with mates. & I hated it when I was made to choose either /or, it has made the game less enjoyable for me 2bh.

[Ethes]

I'm happy the way it is at the moment. Achievements (I don't wanna do glory anymore in 2 different raidsizes + the arguement for seperate achievements are usually coming from people who're not getting realm firsts because they're behind a guild in the "other bracket" or from people who feel that their raidsize is the only proper raidsize as the other raidsize is "easier", which is basically isn't. Both raidsizes have easier and harder fights. It's always been like that and it always will be like that!) and lockouts are fine as they are!

What I would like to see changed however is to get the seperate lockouts back for WotLK content. If I wanna farm achievements there or w/e, I wanna be able to do both 25m and 10m in the same week as thats the way it was when it was current!

[Duridi]

Yes, I have always favoured the shared loot and lockout between 10 and 25 man.

[Lilija]

I'm a fan of the shared lockout - already raiding 5 days a week when we're progressing. Feeling obligated to raid 10's for extra loot / points during the weekend was not something I enjoyed. Occasionally it could be fun, sure, but most of the time it was just a burden.

Exactly my feelings. This is the part I mostly enjoy about the new system and by no means I would like to come back to the old.

However, I do feel shared lockouts created some new problems like 25 man guilds switching to 10 man when it's easier to get higher on rankings on a particular fight - especially for realm firsts. I think that 10 man and 25 man should have separate realm first achievements. Also, there should be more recognition in the game itself for 10 and 25 man achievements. And no, it's not the "10 man are easier than 25 man" (tho 25 man raiding/geared guild 10 man will usually be easier experience) - it's mostly that different raid size, different issues. These are 2 worlds of raiding and should not be put in the same line.

[Deleted]

originally 25man guilds ran 25 for progression and loot and ran 10 man for valor and ofspec upgrades
today -> 10 man guilds run 10 man for progression and run 25man LFR for valor and ofspec upgrades

[Lord Blackmore]

Still large parts of the community are too damn ignorant to accept why it came in the first place.

I've heard all of the reasons. And I don't even disagree with some of them. But the fact remains that something I liked to have as an option was taken away from me. Which means that all of those reasons are largely irrelevant to me. Why? Because what I want as a player is more important to me than what someone else might want. Of course, it doesn't mean what I want is what Blizzard should do, or that what I want is objectively more important, but I think I have the right to be a little selfish.

But I also realize that Blizzard is gonna do what it's gonna do, so I don't complain about shared lockouts, except when threads like this come along.

And, btw, ignorance is irrelevant. Someone doesn't have to know the reasons why Blizzard did something to disagree with it, especially if it directly affects them in some way. But make no mistake, people around here, anyway, aren't ignorant of the reasons.

[Draeblin]

Not having same lockout would lead to 25m guilds getting big advantages over 10m guilds because they could easily clear 25+2x10 and every loot would stay in the guild for 25m progress. A 10m guild could not do this. So not having the same lockout would be totally stupid.

10man is easier than 25man.
10man drops more gear per player than 25man
10man drops more mounts per player than 25man
10man drops more legendaries per player than 25man

Is there some irony I do not see in your post? Because (beside the mount maybe) nothing of this is true.

[Aschark]

Not having same lockout would lead to 25m guilds getting big advantages over 10m guilds because they could easily clear 25+2x10 and every loot would stay in the guild for 25m progress. A 10m guild could not do this. So not having the same lockout would be totally stupid.

...

Not sure if trolling