Page 17 of 61 FirstFirst ...
7
15
16
17
18
19
27
... LastLast
  1. #321
    Deleted
    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.

  2. #322
    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.

  3. #323
    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.

  4. #324
    Deleted
    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.

  5. #325
    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.

  6. #326
    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.

  7. #327
    Deleted
    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.

  8. #328
    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 just Bad LTP

  9. #329
    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.

  10. #330
    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 just Bad LTP

  11. #331
    Elemental Lord
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    8,868
    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.

  12. #332
    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.

  13. #333
    Deleted
    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.

  14. #334
    I think Blizzard's first move should be monthly "Transfer passes"


    Pay say $50 and allow an account to transfer as many toons as they want during that time [including Faction changes] (never the same toon more than once every 3 days)...this will allow people that want to move to a new server with a guild that does 25mans the ability to get their 11 toons for less than $275.

  15. #335
    The Patient Divr's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    316
    Quote Originally Posted by jayinjersey View Post
    I think Blizzard's first move should be monthly "Transfer passes"


    Pay say $50 and allow an account to transfer as many toons as they want during that time [including Faction changes] (never the same toon more than once every 3 days)...this will allow people that want to move to a new server with a guild that does 25mans the ability to get their 11 toons for less than $275.
    Part of the problem with 25man raiding as stated earlier many times, is recruiting. People want to join other guilds on other servers for progression or w/e their reason is, but the transfer cost is a big deterrance for 25man guilds looking to recruit these players.

    Maybe they should lower the cost of the transfer to near minimal pricing, or remove it all together (its not like it takes any effort on their part anymore since theyve automated the whole process over hte last few years). I admit back when wow started, the transfer fee was somewhat needed as it actually took real man power and time to transfer the characters around manually. Since it's now automated, besides overhead on the server and network which really is very minimal compared to that of the wow service itself, there doesnt seem to be any need to a transfer fee except todiscourage gold sellers for the most part imo.
    I know not with what weapons WWIII will be fought, but WWIV will be fought with sticks and stones. ~Albert Einstein


  16. #336
    Quote Originally Posted by Paulosio View Post
    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.
    While I disagree with the rest of you post because I know that 25man players in raids have more to deal with than 10man players, I'm not going to argue that here.

    The people doing the extra work want their guild as a whole rewarded for it. My extra effort, my sacrifices are all for my guild. I give two shits if I get a shinny new mount or a some huge ass title with fireworks going off. I know my job is a thankless one and that is fine with me.

    Randomly on top of that, it isn't just the officers/GM doing the out of raid work. Lots of membership helps out with recruiting and such since its a huge burden. It can be little things like friends who want to raid or bumping recruitment posts or posting in other threads.

  17. #337
    I'll be honest-- I'm fine with 25m raiders having a better chance at rewards. I am not fine with them getting objectively better or different rewards that are not obtainable in 10m.

    I don't want 25m players to be forced to do 10m raids, but I also do not want to be forced to try to find a 25m group so that I can have competitive gear and collect desirable items. I raided in Wrath, and the split lockout/better gear from 25m raids nearly burned me out-- I almost quit.

  18. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by Daetur View Post
    I'll be honest-- I'm fine with 25m raiders having a better chance at rewards. I am not fine with them getting objectively better or different rewards that are not obtainable in 10m.
    The problem being that only exclusive items/perks will save 25mans. Anything that can be gotten in 10s and 25s alike won't fix anything unless the drop rate is just amazingly skewed, ie 50% to 2%. I don't see Blizzard doing anything of the sort so it has to be left to unique vanity rewards, mounts/titles/pets/look. Hell, make them all FoS so achievement whores don't feel the need to "HAVE" to do them.

  19. #339
    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
    No you don't.
    Maybe that's your maxFPS out of fight when you're zoomed in and looking at the ground. I have a Phenom II X4 with a 560 TI and I don't even get constant 60FPS in 10man.
    25man is almost unplayable at times, certainly not enjoyable.
    Maybe if you're playing with a low resolution and super low details.

  20. #340
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by jayinjersey View Post
    I think Blizzard's first move should be monthly "Transfer passes"
    No. What should've happened a long time ago is that each character has free transfers, on a long (> month) cooldown. Unfortunately paid transfers are just too good money and Blizzard prioritizes profit over players every time. When 25 man raiding died on my server, my choices were to either do 10 man raiding (not interesting or challenging enough for me) or pay $100+ to move to a server with 25 man guilds; I chose to just quit.

Posting Permissions

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