T14 Raids - 10 mans harder than 25 mans?

[Einsz]

10 man seems to be way easier just like always

[DetectiveJohnKimble]

The only reason that 25 mans are harder is because you need to get 25 people that are competent and skillfull enough to raid with you, as well as competent enough to not fuck up the mechanics.

And personally, this might not be a part in the current top ranked guild standings, but I feel that the reason why you are seeing more top ranked guilds as 25-mans is because the majority of the amazing and top ranked guilds are 25-man.

Yeah, when you think of Method or vodka, you'd think their equivalents are people in guilds like Paragon. Not surprisingly, all of them are 6/6. I'm having a hard time seeing how some of those 10 man guilds that are top on wowprogress have rosters that are as good as the 25s. It's possible though- who knows.

Also, we just saw a top tier 25 man guild drop to 10 man this expansion and get world first 6/6. Would they have gotten H WotE faster if they were 25 man or 10 man? I think the answer to that is obvious, and is telling about the general difficulty of running 25s v 10s.

[Deleted]

This question usually has to be answered on a boss to boss basis. Only speaking about nh, since we couldn't kill Elegon in 25man mode we're not heroic ready yet, in my personal opinion it's like:
1) Stone Guards: Easier in 25man, because you have two adds which don't regen energy, which leaves more possibilities for taunting.
2) Feng: Comparable.
3) Gara'jal: Easier in 10man, because of the coordination between groups / people with voodoo dolls.
4) Spirit Kings: Really easy in 25man, but we didn't try the boss in 10.
5) Elegon: This encounter has, in my opinion, the biggest difference between 10 and 25 man modes. You need much more DPS and a much better coordination in 25man mode, which is why we couldn't kill it this week (10man was first try, though we killed it there already last week and had experience in that mode).
6) Will of the Emperor: Easy in 10man, killed it in the 4th try. Didn't try 25 yet.

[Deleted]

10 mans are by far easier, however what you currently notice is :

1) Paragon is the only qualitative 10 man raiding guild and all these guilds that were highly ranked in cataclysm were all frauds and now showed how bad they actually are. Therefor most of them are struggling because they are bad and not because 10mans are hard. Because they ain't hard at all, you just can't afford one slacker in ur team.

[Sprucelee]

Pretty simple, the 10-man field is not nearly as skilled.

The disparity between the one 25 man that dropped down (Paragon) and the rest only goes to further support just how much better the players are that have gathered in the top guilds over the years. Those guilds have been 25 mans... just simple fact.

And to be honest, even the good 10 mans I personally followed in Cata went to 25s. I fully expect Paragon to jump back up soon.

Notice I never mentioned which is "harder", but if I was pressed on the issue it looks like it is pretty even, but Paragon was able to tackle some of the bugs and odd tuning better in a 10-man, you might call that easier but it's clise to call.

[Fleuria]

The disparity between 25 and 10 has always been enrage timers, 10man is now struggling because blizzard have actually realised they need to put in enrage timers to try and keep the sizes comparable as last expansion everything was a complete push over on 10 due to no enrages and was aswell on beta so they tightened the timers from then and now its challenging, oh well its fun at least watching the whine.

[Darkfrosty]

ofcourse 25,
even first boss 3adds vs 4adds already make huge difference
hardcore guilds know it and they trying to keep it,
instead other people going for less path of resistance

many people have said 10 man stone guards is harder on heroic because you get 3 tanks in 25 man which makes it a joke. Please do some research before you just assume.

---------- Post added 2012-10-16 at 09:41 PM ----------

So many assumptions here. 3rd boss is very difficult for 10 mans because of how the adds work (at the end of the fight the adds have less targets to hit in a 10 man and therefore accounts for much more spike dmg where in 25 you have many more targets they can hit).

Main reason so many 10 mans are stuck on 3rd boss.

[Adornus]

As a player who raided Heroic Progression 10s in T11, T12, and half of T13, and now raids Heroic Progression 25s, there is one fallacy I want to clear up:

10m Raiders say there is "more room for error in 25s". I said this when I was raiding 10s as well. This is 100% not true.

Take Heroic Gara'jal for example. If even one of our DPS fails going to the spirit realm, or dies, this almost always puts us behind in DPS needed to take out adds below. This also puts us behind in boss DPS as the enrage is EXTREMELY tight on 25m. You have to run four healers. On 10m you can have the enrage be EXTREMELY tight as well, if you run three healers.

Does anyone not see the imbalance there? The only thing that can make 10m tougher is the probability of someone getting one shot by Shadow Bolts, but even then the better your DPS does down below, the less of a possibility that is. This is supposedly the boss that is so much harder on 10m. I just don't see how you can completely negate the healing requirements by bringing three healers and still make enrage; and then call it difficult. In 25m you need a dedicated healer almost solely on the tank shielding, and filling in on VD targets when they can, since the tank gets hit so hard.

So to get back to my original statement, people need to stop saying there is more room for error in 25m, it's simply not true. I think being able to negate hard mechanics by bringing another healer is way more room for error than having more battle rezzes.

[Deleted]

cant compare

[Rory]

I have not raided this tier but because of recent history (the last 4-5 tiers) I'd say 25m is still probably harder. My guess is that the numbers are like that because most of the serious progression, world first type guilds are 25 and isn't really a reflection of difficulty. Both raid sizes present their own challenges. In Cata, with the exception of a few fights in t11 the dos/healing requirements and mechanics were significantly harder on 25. We had an alt run that was as progressed as our main raid and actually had to stop progression so they didn't kill Ragnaros prior to our main raid getting it. I've done most of the last couple tiers on both modes, both require skill, time and coordination.

I'd give it some time and the numbers will balance out..

[Deleted]

My opinion on the matter, when any 10 man raiders, wonder, or claim that 10s at any given fight or tier, are harder than 25s.

Do you have the people to run 25s?
Do you even have the drive or the stomach to try them?

If not, why asking?
You want to feel special as a 10 man raider, by having many people saying that you re doing the "hard stuff"?
You are not special, everybody raids 10, weather they like it or not. So you 're just going with the flow, nothing difficult in it.

So, do your 10 man, and let those that actually do 25s at the top level, and inevitably do the 10 runs as well, have an opinion about it.
The difficulty of the 10 man is what it is. The difficulty of 25 is also given.
What the others do wont change your game experience.
Unless if you want to ask for nerfs (because it is not fair that 25s have it "easy" lol)

[Penguintamer]

The best guild on our realm has always been a 25 man guild who has gotten kills before everyone else. Yet some completely random 10 man guild on our realm managed to clear all of Mogu'shun Vaults before them, because its 10 man. Another 10 man on our realm cleared all of Dragon Soul on the first day, while the 25 man guilds took an extra week for it, because it was more difficult.

Its the same every time.

[Zoldor]

The reason for the gap in the world first, high end market is they changed a fight after everyone had it gimped for the first couple of days. One of the fights has changed and is arguably harder after the change. This may be causing the gap in which guilds have finished HC and which haven't.

---------- Post added 2012-10-17 at 10:56 PM ----------

The best guild on our realm has always been a 25 man guild who has gotten kills before everyone else. Yet some completely random 10 man guild on our realm managed to clear all of Mogu'shun Vaults before them, because its 10 man. Another 10 man on our realm cleared all of Dragon Soul on the first day, while the 25 man guilds took an extra week for it, because it was more difficult.

Its the same every time.

Doesn't sound much like the best guild on your server is that 25 man. Sounds like they either had internal issues/lineup changes/burnout occur and dethrone them not the difference between 10 and 25. Also for Vaults 10 man guilds that did beta are more likely than 25 man guilds that did the bosses in beta.

[Deleted]

Warning: Bad english.

I still don't understand why blizzard didn't just do 10man and 20 man raids,it would fix so many issues with having 10 and 25man both in gear drop, raid balancing and guilds being able to play as they want.

[Deleted]

Warning: Bad english.

I still don't understand why blizzard didn't just do 10man and 20 man raids,it would fix so many issues with having 10 and 25man both in gear drop, raid balancing and guilds being able to play as they want.

In the given raiding model, keeping 10 man and downsizing 25 to 20 has little meaning.

It would only make it easier for small guilds that want to raid the large raid, to upsize.
But why you should want that in the first place? You get everything in the small raid...Even the ranking page in wow progress by default is the "10/25 progress".

In a raiding model where the 2 sizes are offering different content, or in a -wrath like- shared content model, where the larger raid offers better loot and status, a 10/20 or 12/24 or even a 15/30 would make much more sence than 10/25.

In my opinion 25 was an unfortunate choice that Blizzard felt compelled to make, when they decided to delete 40 man raids.
When they were designing TBC expansion, they wanted to create more tactical fights, better visuals etc. For that reason, 40 man had to go.
At the same time, during vanila, they had 20 man raids. Due to them being "the small size" trapped blizzard to take 25 instead of 20, to offer at least "smt bigger than just Zul Gurub".
The sideffect of that desicion, was that it made the hole upsizing thing, for newly formed guild a living hell, having to reach the "two karazhan groups and a bit" to start the 25 man raids.

Then that gating of majority of guilds out of the majority of content brought the decision for shared content....

And the shared content brought the thought, "since content is shared, why everything else should be seperated?"

That final stupid thought brought the $hitty situation that we have to deal with now.

And if you look at the hole picture you just realize that we got here, just because Blizzard in every expansion was spotting the problem with raids correctly, but was making the wrong decision regarding how the problem should be solved...

[mag07]

In the given raiding model, keeping 10 man and downsizing 25 to 20 has little meaning.

It would only make it easier for small guilds that want to raid the large raid, to upsize.
But why you should want that in the first place? You get everything in the small raid...Even the ranking page in wow progress by default is the "10/25 progress".

In a raiding model where the 2 sizes are offering different content, or in a -wrath like- shared content model, where the larger raid offers better loot and status, a 10/20 or 12/24 or even a 15/30 would make much more sence than 10/25.

In my opinion 25 was an unfortunate choice that Blizzard felt compelled to make, when they decided to delete 40 man raids.
When they were designing TBC expansion, they wanted to create more tactical fights, better visuals etc. For that reason, 40 man had to go.
At the same time, during vanila, they had 20 man raids. Due to them being "the small size" trapped blizzard to take 25 instead of 20, to offer at least "smt bigger than just Zul Gurub".
The sideffect of that desicion, was that it made the hole upsizing thing, for newly formed guild a living hell, having to reach the "two karazhan groups and a bit" to start the 25 man raids.

Then that gating of majority of guilds out of the majority of content brought the decision for shared content....

And the shared content brought the thought, "since content is shared, why everything else should be seperated?"

That final stupid thought brought the $hitty situation that we have to deal with now.

And if you look at the hole picture you just realize that we got here, just because Blizzard in every expansion was spotting the problem with raids correctly, but was making the wrong decision regarding how the problem should be solved...

Pretty much that. Right now it's a very difficult situation, my biggest concern with same level/different size raids is one thing - the instances are designed to fit 25 people, unless the locations will shrink on the flow, it will never be an even ground for the two sizes. BC model may not have been the best for reasons stated above, but what it did succeed at, is proper design and space for the two different setups.

Most logical way out of Vanilla would've been to cut the raid size in half, 40 to 20, similarly, same was the case end of Wrath, 20/10 would've kept a lot of guilds going, and integrating smaller guilds into a big one, or simply raiding partners, easy.

Numbers aside, what Blizzard effectively did, is nearly half the work needed to produce a tier by making 10/25 mens 'equivalent'. Yes, both instances still need individual tunning, the design however is uniform for both, no need for new locations, no need for new gear.