With the latest Cata Raid where raids will share the same Lockout which raid type do you prefer?
Dragon — Mon, 04/26/2010 - 10:31
I prefer a 25m raid because it's like a frat party with less of a chance of getting STDs
33% (21 votes)
I prefer a 10m raid because you can keep a tighter group of people
37% (23 votes)
I like running both all the time on my main, Purplez are the shitz
11% (7 votes)
Raiding ha my arena rating means more than your LK kill ever will
3% (2 votes)
Does this mean I can have a second third main for my dogs alt?
6% (4 votes)
But what about Oranges?
10% (6 votes)
Total votes: 63
Groups:


If there is no 25 man raid
Lilpuddinpop — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 10:48If there is no 25 man raid left. This game will have lost it's appeal to me. a bunch of scrubs can put together a 10 man and do an raid. It takes a dedicated bunch to make a 25 man and do well.
Notice how few guilds are downing LK 25 man. Are you glad to part of that few? Or would it be fine if even pancakes/azune/djpenguin/everyother scrub player on this server can down the same content as you.
So your arguement is you play
saedo — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 12:11So your arguement is you play this game to feel better cause you can gloat over some players you don't like.
And again, I'll have to say, your logic doesn't account for the fact that 10 mans will be harder. They probably want to ramp up difficultly in 10 mans, and there's absolutely no way to out gear the 10 man before you first step into it.
Right now, you can be geared in 264s, 258s, and stomp the ICC10 251 instance. Hell even if you aren't that geared, you'd be in 245s doing a 251, so half a tier gear behind at most.
Imagine the 10 man strict guilds more, try doing ICC10 in full 232s, and truly "earning" the higher tier of 251s.
Its not to gloat
Lilpuddinpop — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 12:32k, imagine your not in downfall... why do you want to join us? Well I for one thought, "wow these guys are pushing 25 man content, they are a tight nit grp that are all commited to one goal. They do the content that I will never do in a lot of other guilds"
I love the fact we do 25 mans, I love being in the 25 man raid, having a good leader, having an awesome website, being part of a grp of people all commited to a goal.
To me, if we step down to seperate 10 mans, WoW will lose a lot of that appeal I love.
Then this might be a good
saedo — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 13:06Then this might be a good thing. We've always tried to say we're a community first. You join to want to be part of it. Not just get epix phat lewtz. It's why the app process is so long.
But we'll have to see how it turns out. Who knows, it could still wind up being "Wow look at Downfall, running 12 different 10 mans all killing hard mode Deathwing, let me in on that action plx plx plx"
10 man's
Lilpuddinpop — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 23:50It looks glorious to have that many 10 mans doing content. But in my previous guild I had a run in with this same type of idea.
Serenity, my former guild.
We ran 1 25 man and from that 25 man we ran 3 seperate 10 man grps.
grp 1 was made up of the allstars of the guild, all the names you probably heard(georgepatton for one) and myself
grp 2 struggled to make its grp every week and find contistent members
grp 3 was always online but was never able to down content like grp 1 or 2 did.
This is my problem with the splitting into 10 mans. We will have a couple allstar 10 mans which most guild leaders and high ranking member will be a part of while the rest of us are a grp 2 or 3.
btw, at about 1/2 a year later....
grp 1, beast healer and 1 tank left game, we stole replacements from grp 2.
grp 2, with the tank and healer missing grp dissolved, rest of raid quit guild.
grp 3, only grp still untouched, only grp still not downing content.
I only see chaos and rejection coming from the split up of our beautiful 25 man. How could I part with the likes of elapsed or nuit to name a few. Always love me some grp 3 too.
I agree with Saedo here. The
Scaron — Sat, 05/01/2010 - 06:59I agree with Saedo here.
The biggest factor would be that you're choosing to do one or the other 10 or 25 man. Why do 10 mans have a hard time getting people? IMO it's because, for most of us, it's sort of our second priority--a thing we do on the weekend or when we have time. But, if we all were focused on joining 10-mans and being there consistently like we were for 25 mans, they'd be more successful.
Further, the flexibility of having to satisfy only 10 schedules rather than 25 will make timing easier. Sure, some raids will form around hard-core-ed-ness, however some raids will have 7 nights a week to choose from in term of timing, instead of being relegated to the weekend. That should make it easier to find time with people of a similar level of drive / skill as ourselves to raid with.
And frankly, if you're not seeing chaos and rejection in 25 man, I think you're probably not looking in the right places.
In all technicality, the 25
saedo — Sat, 05/01/2010 - 00:48In all technicality, the 25 man will be "split" either way. When Wrath hit, the BC 25s mans were dissolved and restarted with new names. People switched raids, left game, stepped up, dumped to the curb, etc, etc. So the "chaos and rejection" was automatically gonna happen anyways.
Then it's a matter of perception, and the viability of 10 mans in the future, and if even any guilds are gonna manage a 25 man.
Take this, the Blues have stated they may make the Server First achievements apply to 10 man, and you'd only get one of them (that or 25 man), whichever comes first.
So what would guilds do. The top in the world, hell not even them, how bout Epidemic? Gunning for server firsts, would they gather 25 people for them? Or would they take a 10 man and try that? Which sounds more likely? Probably the speediest method?
And should all those top guilds gun for it with 10 mans, what happens after they get it? Do they disband the group to raid 25? What happens next patch? Stick with 25, or break off again? Or do they continue in their own clique? What winds up happening with them could trickle down and change the entire perception of 10 mans for everyone.
Anyways, this might be getting a bit off track. Back to your points.
Firstly, stealing members from one group to another would be a no no. Hope there's enough sense for that.
Secondly, ok, this is gonna get heavy. Have you ever created / managed a 25 man? It's easy to say that it's your favorite / only way of raiding when all you have to do is log on and push buttons (correctly, hopefully). But of course, this means I'm showing some bias (traumas) due to all this. lol
Currently, I'm thinking we have 7-8 10 mans in guild. Some more "all star" than others yes. But a part of that is due to today's raiding environment. The 25s occupy most the time, so not everyone wants to (or able to) be part of a 10 man. Freeing up that lockout / time slot would only increase the pool of players to 10 man possibly creating more groups, possibly raising the level from more of the 10 mans.
Here's some of the Top Guilds
saedo — Fri, 04/30/2010 - 10:41Here's some of the Top Guilds in the World respond to this change: http://www.worldofraids.com/topic/16484-focus-cataclysm-raiding-curse-or-blessing/
This week started off with somewhat of a bomb coming from Blizzard. Nethaera announced that there will be major changes to raiding come Cataclysm. The main change is that they are combining all raid sizes and difficulties into one single lockout. 10-man and 25-man raids will have the same difficulty and share loot drops as well. Gating will be there still, but limited attempts are gone.
Naturally, the news caused a lot of discussion regarding whether this change was a positive or a negative. The question is though, how will this change influence the top guilds and progression raiding?
Huge positive
"This will be a huge positive for our guild. We are all very excited over the changes. New content in general is fun, and knowing we don't have to raid it in 10, 10 heroic and 25 normal is awesome to hear. Finally we can just do 25 heroic and not be completely sick of the content the third week it is out," says Xav, protection warrior and officer in Premonition.
Premonition was the first North American guild to kill the heroic 25-man Lich King, but in the process, a lot of the players felt burned out and unhappy about the heavy raid schedule. In particular Trial of the Crusader, where normal and heroic modes were separated, took its toll on many hardcore raiders. The Cataclysm raiding system seems to be the total opposite.
One of the main concerns about this change is the balance in difficulty between 10-man and 25-man raids. In Wrath of the Lich King, the difficulty level has been far from balanced. While in most cases, the 25-man encounters have been harder, most raiders recall Sartharion with three drakes up and how the 10-man version ended up being tougher than the 25-man one.
"We are sceptical of Blizzard being able to balance 10s and 25s appropriately so they share difficulty. There are so many restrictions, like raid buffs and debuffs, how many healers and tanks to bring, favouring all ranged or all melee for synergy and so on. It will be hard for them to do," Xav thinks.
Up until now, the 25-man raids have been where the greatest status has been at. The true progression races have always taken place in the 25-man raids, and Xav thinks that this is how it will be also come Cataclysm.
"We just have to see how it turns out. While we may do 10 player raids on alts or if for some unlikely reason we can't form a 25 player raid, we are going to stay focused on solely doing 25s. Most, if not all top end guilds will be competing together in the 25-man versions," Xav thinks.
Less work, more game
Xass, guild leader of the the German guild Irae AoD who got the world 8th Lich King kill, agrees that the change seems to be for the better. "Some guys are a little unsure of how the raid size thing will change our guild's raiding experience. But especially our veteran players are happy with the changes. A little quotation from a long time member: Those changes will make WoW feel more like a game and less like work again," he says.
For him, the new system seems to take some of the pressure off progression orientated guilds. During Icecrown Citadel progression, 10-man runs felt mandatory, which took away a lot of the fun of it. However, just like Xav, Xass is sceptical when it comes to balancing 10-mans versus 25-mans. While he doubts they can make it happen, he feels that the world first race could get an interesting twist should they manage.
In such a case, Irae AoD does not rule out the guild doing 10-man content. In fact, Xass is eager to try 10-man raids without overgearing the encounters. "It is hard to tell by now, but I can imagine we will give 10-man raids a shot. In 10-man raids there is much more emphasis on each individual player, so raiding is more intense. If they really balance them right, 10-mans will get a lot more attention, but old habits are hard to overcome, so I doubt 10-man raids will replace 25-mans when it comes to PvE competition," Xass says.
One of Blizzard's mantras has been to bring the player, not the class. While Xass feels they have achieved that to a certain degree, end game Wrath of the Lich King content still favoured raid stacking. He is a bit worried that 10-man raids will run into lineup problems.
"In my opinion, 10-man raids are putting too much emphasis on lineups. Covering all raid buffs is still an issue in 10-mans. In 25-mans there are more tactical variations. Though it will depend a lot on the community. At the moment I can't tell which raid size is going to be the 'progression' raid, though if both formats are equally accepted, we will be doing 25-man raids for more loot," he says.
Sceptical
While Xav and Xass are fairly positive towards the change, Paragon officer Lazeil is not among those who immediately embrace it. In Paragon, reactions were mixed. A minority liked the changes, several disliked it though the majority didn't care. "My main fear is that Blizzard will make 25-man content too easy because balancing 10-mans requires it. And there goes my incentive to play the game," Lazeil says.
For a guild that tops the progression world ranking, balancing issues is something they deal with constantly. Lazeil thinks just balancing something like melee versus ranged in today's content is hard in itself, since some specs will be better in some fights. For cutting edge raids, that means raid stacking is required.
"The hardest encounters can only be beaten with a specific setup which has enough stuff like Aura Masteries, Hands of Protection, ridiculous AoE, good single target dps or whatever. Imagine doing the Malygos achievement with a melee raid when Wrath of the Lich King was new. It would be a hundred times harder than with casters. So it all comes down to whether Blizzard can make hard fights which don't require all those special abilities. Personally, I don't think they can," he admits.
Paragon was one of the guilds that pushed the hardest with alt raids during Icecrown Citadel progression. Running three 25-man ICC raids a week in order to gear up their mains, they managed to get a gear advantage that most likely helped them get the world first heroic Lich King kill.
Alt runs is something Lazeil certainly wouldn't mind getting rid of. After Paragon killed the Lich King, Lazeil hasn't touched his alt at all. Though come Cataclysm, he is preparing to level up several classes. Other players in the guild are looking to gear up three or maybe four characters. So instead of running multiple runs with each characters, they seem to be aiming for the same amount of runs just with several toons. The main reason is that Blizzard is continuing the gating system, which makes top guilds want to farm normal modes with multiple raids both to gear up mains and to have well-geared alts available for class stacking.
"I am guessing most of the guilds that are seriously working on heroic 25-man Lich King wish their resto druids had retribution paladin alts, like one of our druids did. We stacked classes for every hard ICC boss. Six druids on Lady Deathwhisper was nice, for example. Combat rez is so insane. I could easily use 8-10 druids on a fight like Deathwhisper while progressing, and it would still be a good raid. So limited attempts is not the only thing keeping alt raiding alive, but I am glad they are removing those," he says.
Nonetheless, Lazeil doesn't think Paragon as a guild will be affected much. He expects that 25-man raids will keep their status as the main thing, given that Blizzard manages to balance the game properly. And although he is sceptical, he doesn't see it as an all negative thing.
"I guess this is a welcomed change for most of the player base, because most 25-man raiders are stuck in guilds with bad players. 10-mans are more fun for most people. But if I could choose, I would have 25-mans only," he says with a smile.
In a sense, this gives us
Dufe — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 17:05In a sense, this gives us somewhat of an Occam's razor situation. The "All other things being equal, the simplest answer is preferred" heuristic. That is, if all other things (gear, gold, badges, difficulty, etc) are equal, then the simplest solution (10 man raid) is what people are going to prefer. Naturally, this has drivers beyond player preference.
As all companies do, Blizzard strives for efficiency. They thought that combining 10 and 25 man raids into the same zones would save them money on instance design, which I'm sure it did overall. But if you look at it from a boss encounter standpoint, they are currently designing at least 4 versions of every boss fight (10/25 and hard/easy) and more if were to have the same boss and such in a 5 man version. If they can slowly eliminate 25-man raids, they have not only eliminated 33%-50% of the encounters that have to be tuned, they have eliminated arguably the most challenging instantiation of that tuning.
So while their marketing lingo is "We want to make sure all players have a chance to experience all of the content," the real business driver is/was: "If we use the same boss in every possible use case, then we don't have to make as many bosses." In other words, this isn't so much about catering to 'whiny casuals' as it is about maximizing the efficiency of their programmers, designers, etc. Also, though we'd need Mag or someone to confirm this, I would venture a guess that burn out is far less common in players who run in smaller raids/parties/etc; so there may be an element of player retention involved if that is true.
This drive for efficiency is common to the vast majority of large American corporations (especially the public-ownership ones), and I have a hard time in one sense faulting them for doing what is commonly accepted practice. That being said, it has always frustrated me that the added profit margin from these drives get's shoved in the pockets of a very few who, in all honesty, had little real impact on the quality of the game itself. I would love to see Blizzard step above the short-sighted norms of the dividend hoarding American stock holders and instead re-invest those profits into making a better experience that truly caters to all players in their own way instead of homogenizaing every last aspect of the game in an attempt to pinch pennies that in their case don't honestly need pinching. (I mean have you seen their financials? I'm not talking about their stock value, I really couldn't care less about that. Their profits and cash flows are . . . ample.)
I guess I'm curious what this
Scaron — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:34I guess I'm curious what this does to the main / alt distinction. At first glance it seems plausible that one might be able to support 2 viable toons at a high gear level. But, I suppose that all depends on how much content is available.
It's likely the same as now.
saedo — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:55It's likely the same as now. To support 2 toons like that you would have to raid twice as much. So, since they've cut off some raiding time with one toon, if you choose to fill that extra time doing the instance again on an alt...
Also, keep in mind that the 10 mans likely won't be as "easy" as the 10 mans are now. They said they want to bring it in line with 25 man difficulty. So, 3 day clear on 25 man = 3 day clear on 10 man, would be their hopes.
Also note that you won't be overgearing a 10 man. That is, right now you can be fully geared in 264 and go back and stomp a 251 level instance, even heroic mode is merely just 264. Those 10 mans will be getting gear equal or of higher ilvl than they can already obtain. It's almost like 10 man strict guilds atm, though even harder cause diffculty ramped up, and likely won't have access to badge gear that's a tier ahead (again 264 badge gear to stomp 251 instance).
It's probably too early to
saedo — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 14:03It's probably too early to make any final decisions.
It all comes down to how the instances wind up being structured, how much incentive do 25s have, who stays, who jump ships, who steps up, etc, etc. We shall have to see how this cataclysmic event shakes up the guild!
If anything, this means
garreth — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 13:23If anything, this means Downfall moves to a SINGLE 25-man raid. The 10s just look so much more appealing at this point. Nine other badass, committed people? Hell yeah. Not having to wait an hour for the last 2 dps to login? !!
We have, at the very least,
Agoney — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 12:52We have, at the very least, 50 raiders in the guild. I'd like to see everyone's opinions on this.
I like the general concept of
Derchlon — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 12:52I like the general concept of one raid lockout per character per dungeon, kinda like the old SSC/TK, but with either 10 or 25 man options, 10 man will almost always win. There will be very few 25 man raids left, including sponsored guilds. I think an unforseen consequence is the end of 25 man raids, similar to the death of 40 man raids. 25s are harder to organize and keep going than 10 mans, with little to no extra reward for those troubles.
Unless 25 mans have unique mechanics 10 mans won't have, I can barely even see a desire to raid in them, especially with all of the focus on items like drums of kings and wild, fort scrolls, and hunter pets that can fill buff/debuff raid gaps.
I prefered the BC raid system better than Wrath and, now they're hybridizing the two in such a way as to kill 25s.
/pour a 40 for 25 mans.
I agree with this... 25s
Pelana — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 15:33I agree with this... 25s dropping more loot isn't really much of an incentive to deal with all the extra people and time issues. I'm not going to make any real judgements until I see how it turns out but I have a feeling that unless legendaries are 25 only or there is a huge difference in gold/badges it will be 10s only for most people.
Who knows though, maybe it will work really well and allow for more flexibility.
I'd say, unless they drop 7
Derchlon — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 17:22I'd say, unless they drop 7 pieces or more of loot per boss, there will be no point to 25mans at all.
I would like to change my
Elapsed — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 11:59I would like to change my vote to I want 40 mans back, you know something that feels genuinely Epic! even if it's more difficult to co-ordinate
To add to this, kinda:
saedo — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 02:55To add to this, kinda: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=24401796793&pageNo=1#0
We're continuing to refine the badge/emblem and PvP point systems in Cataclysm and we'd like to share some of those changes with you today. Please enjoy!
Our primary goal when approaching badges in Cataclysm is to address a lot of the confusion that comes with these currency systems. To that end we're changing badges to a more straightforward point system, similar to the ones we've used for a while for Arenas and Battlegrounds. There will be a total of four types of points you can earn in Cataclysm (two for PvE and two for PvP), and these will remain the same even as we introduce new content.
Here's the breakdown:
PvE
Hero Points -- Low-tier, easier-to-get PVE points. Maximum cap to how many you can own, but no cap to how quickly you can earn them. Earned from most dungeons. (most like the current Emblem of Triumph)
Valor Points -- High-tier, harder-to-get PvE points. Maximum cap to how many you can own, as well as a cap to how many you can earn per week. Earned from Dungeon Finder daily Heroic and from raids. (most like the current Emblem of Frost)
PvP
Honor Points -- Low-tier, easier-to-get PVP points. There will be a maximum cap to how many you can own, but no cap to how quickly you can earn them. Earned from most PvP activities.
Conquest Points -- High-tier, harder-to-get PvP points. There will be a maximum cap to how many you can own, and a cap to how many you can earn per week. Earned from winning Rated Battlegrounds or Arenas. (currently called Arena Points)
When a new tier of raiding gear is released or a new PvP season begins, your higher tier of points will be converted into the lower tier. For instance, if a new tier of raid gear is released, your Valor points will be converted to Hero points, and similarly if a new PvP season begins your Conquest points will be converted to Honor points. Of course that means with these new releases you'll always begin without any of the higher tier of points, and thus be unable to stockpile them.
As noted for Conquest points, the Rated Battlegrounds and Arenas will be sharing this same point type. Because of that, it will in fact be possible to get the best PvP items without setting foot in Arena; however, more powerful armor and weapons will of course require more Conquest points, so players who win their matches more often will still gear up faster. We're removing personal rating requirements on almost all items; they're definitely removed for weapons. We might offer a few items to the absolute best players based on personal rating, largely as cosmetic or 'bragging rights' type items. And you'll have the option of purchasing the previous season’s gear with the more readily available Honor points.
We do plan to have a way to convert Honor points (PvP) into Hero points (PvE), and vice versa, at a loss. The conversions will be possible, but it won't be a 1:1 rate, and you'll have fewer points after the conversion process. We won't allow the higher tiers to be exchanged for each other, however.
To explain the reasoning for the weekly cap on points for the higher tiers, this is to provide flexibility in how players choose to earn the points without feeling like they have to do all of the content as often as it is available. If your Valor income from raiding is sufficient, you may not feel the need to run Dungeon Finder every night, or perhaps even at all. Likewise, a PvP player could choose to participate in a lot of Rated Battlegrounds but no Arenas, or focus on both, and still be able to earn the points they want.
We realize that with any changes to progression pathways there are going to be questions. We're eagerly awaiting any that we may have left unanswered. To the comments!
So badges (and pvp points) are all cleaned up into 2 neat piles. Except, there will be caps. Which meh, already sitting on 400+ triumphs with nothing to spend on. Well, not really, it's part of my emergancy gem stash, so with caps, I'd just be pumping out gems (if they still do that) or whatever a bit sooner than on a need be basis.
But what point I'd like to address is the cap on rate you can get per week. Now this I can see QQ.
1. Likely slowing your rate of gearing via badges compared to now. Thus, time sink added, well, extended.
2. The only way for the cap to make sense is if it's below the natural allowable amount gained. Like with Frost, we can currently get oh... 76 per week with full clears and a bit of luck. So this potentially puts limits on some of our addiction. Like say, can skip daily random dungeon cause it'd cap you. Or no longer farming some old instance for the sake of badges only.
So, players prolly just won't like it for that sake, like someone setting a curfew for you. Oh well, guess gotta work within it.
For those that haven't seen
saedo — Mon, 04/26/2010 - 11:17For those that haven't seen yet: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=24401856405&pageNo=1#0
We're continuing to refine the raid progression paths in Cataclysm, and we'd like to share some of those changes with you today. Please enjoy!
The first of the refinements being made is that we're combining all raid sizes and difficulties into a single lockout. Unlike today, 10- and 25-player modes of a single raid will share the same lockout. You can defeat each raid boss once per week per character. In other words, if you wanted to do both a 10- and 25-person raid in a single week, you’d need to do so on two different characters. Normal versus Heroic mode will be chosen on a per-boss basis in Cataclysm raids, the same way it works in Icecrown Citadel. Obviously the raid lockout change doesn't apply in pure Icecrown terms though, as this change goes hand-in-hand with a few other changes to raid progression in Cataclysm.
We're designing and balancing raids so that the difficulty between 10- and 25-player versions of each difficulty will be as close as possible to each other as we can achieve. That closeness in difficulty also means that we'll have bosses dropping the same items in 10- and 25-player raids of each difficulty. They'll have the same name and same stats; they are in fact the exact same items. Choosing Heroic mode will drop a scaled-up version of those items. Our hope is that players will be able to associate bosses with their loot tables and even associate specific artwork with specific item names to a far greater extent than today.
Dungeon Difficulty and Rewards
10- and 25-player (normal difficulty) -- Very similar to one another in difficulty; drop the exact same items as each other.
10- and 25-player (Heroic difficulty) -- Very similar to one another in difficulty; drop more powerful versions of the normal-difficulty items.
We of course recognize the logistical realities of organizing larger groups of people, so while the loot quality will not change, 25-player versions will drop a higher quantity of loot per player (items, but also badges, and even gold), making it a more efficient route if you're able to gather the people. The raid designers are designing encounters with these changes in mind, and the class designers are making class changes to help make 10-person groups easier to build. Running 25-player raids will be a bit more lucrative, as should be expected, but if for a week or two you need to do 10s because half the guild is away on vacation, you can do that and not suffer a dramatic loss to your ability to get the items you want.
We recognize that very long raids can be a barrier for some players, but we also want to provide enough encounters for the experience to feel epic. For the first few raid tiers, our plan is to provide multiple smaller raids. Instead of one raid with eleven bosses, you might have a five-boss raid as well as a six-boss raid. All of these bosses would drop the same item level gear, but the dungeons themselves being different environments will provide some variety in location and visual style, as well as separate raid lockouts. Think of how you could raid Serpentshrine Cavern and Tempest Keep separately, but you might still want to hit both every week.
We do like how gating bosses over time allows the community to focus on individual encounters instead of just racing to the end boss, so we’re likely to keep that design moving forward. We don't plan to impose attempt limitations again though, except maybe in cases of rare optional bosses (like Algalon). Heroic mode may not be open from day one, but will become available after defeating normal mode perhaps as little as once or twice.
In terms of tuning, we want groups to be able to jump into the first raids pretty quickly, but we also don’t want them to overshadow the Heroic 5-player dungeons and more powerful quest rewards. We’ll be designing the first few raid zones assuming that players have accumulated some blue gear from dungeons, crafted equipment, or quest rewards. In general, we want you and your guild members to participate in and enjoy the level up experience.
We design our raids to be accessible to a broad spectrum of players, so we want groups to be able to make the decision about whether to attempt the normal or Heroic versions of raids pretty quickly. The goal with all of these changes is to make it as much of a choice or effect of circumstance whether you raid as a group of 10 or as a group of 25 as possible. Whether you're a big guild or a small guild the choice won't be dependent on what items drop, but instead on what you enjoy the most.
We realize that with any changes to progression pathways there are going to be questions. We're eagerly awaiting any that we may have left unanswered. To the comments!
Hmm... Interesting, soo..10
Zevix — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 00:26Hmm...
Interesting, soo..10 mans drop the same loot as 25 mans with half as many people to worry about being dumb. I don't see much reason to do 25 mans anymore. I mean yea they can be fun but would it even be worth it to bust your ass putting and keeping a 25 man together. When you can find 10 smart ,solid, consistent people to rock a 10 man with half the trouble go go 10 mans o.0.The sharing of the raid lock outs makes sense I guess if they drop the same loot. I liked it when you could do a 10 man like Kara and have the 25s that were different instances so one had a choice of what to raid and see. Now it's all the same 10/25 same shit same look. /flash back to glory days. If i'm understanding this right the heroic raid or the hard modes will be just like ICC is now? You have a choice on what is heroic or not based on boss to boss then? I think thats fine with me, of all the ways they have done hard modes in WOTLK I like ICC's strat on hard modes best.
As far as gating goes I don't mind it, not really a big deal to me I think its the only way to 100% slow people down from rushing through content. When they speak of the first few raids are going to be like Naxx stupid easy and boring as hell?! I don't see much point of those, get easy purples to build self-esteem and make e-peens larger? I like the idea of earning my gear not being handed easy loots. /sigh at Blizz and changing this game for the casual player *raises fist into the air* what can ya do....all about the money. QQ
I agree Ag achivments are dumb, and pointless I don't think they add to the game at all if anything they take away from it imo. Also I agree..AG YOU SO CRAZY XD
Wow.... I have a couple
Agoney — Mon, 04/26/2010 - 12:50Wow....
I have a couple wishes for this game (raiding wise), which probably would never happen, but here they are anyway:
If they want to have raid achievements, save them for the fluff instances like ZA. I assume the notion to keep raids on similiar lockouts is too lessen the amount of time players are raiding? It just seems really retarded. There really is no reason now to raid 25s with this change.. The benefit of getting an extra item and some extra gold? Not even worth it. Why go through the hassel of getting 25 people when 10 people will get you the same thing?
The removal of limitations is a good thing, and I don't really mind the gating of content if they choose to keep it. The stat change overall seems like a decent change as well, but we will have to see. However, I'm really debating on buying cataclysm with these recent announced changes to raiding.
"Our goal through Wrath of
Agoney — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 17:50"Our goal through Wrath of the Lich King was that players could choose
10 or 25 as a personal preference. We think we missed that mark though.
Because 25s still provided more powerful rewards, it felt like that was
the “real” raiding, and 10s were what you did on off-nights, or if you
just couldn’t stomach the logistics of recruiting or pugging 10 more
players. We know there are a lot of players out there who just prefer
to raid 10s but felt like we didn’t deliver on our promise to let them
just raid 10s. The Cataclysm model is to let players raid 10s or 25s as
they see fit. There are advantages and disadvantages to both raid
sizes. The larger raids can feel more epic, yet the smaller ones tend
to have less loot drama because there is less competition per item that
drops. The smaller raids in some sense are more hardcore, because there
are fewer opportunities to include novice raiders or folks who just
aren’t carrying their weight.
We understand that changes like this can cause social upheaval and we
didn’t make the decision lightly. The community was similarly concerned
when we removed 40-player raids (and we literally did remove those;
today we’re just offering an alternative to the larger raids). We think
there is a non-trivial audience of players who prefer the 25-player
raids and we’re going to continue to support them. We tried many
different raiding models in Wrath of the Lich King with regard to
Heroic modes and lockouts, and rest assured that if we don’t like how
the 4.0 raiding game evolves that we will revisit it for 4.1. "
Well, assuming this goes through, I'm out until 4,1 at very least.
DAMN AG, YOU SO CRAZY.
garreth — Mon, 04/26/2010 - 21:00DAMN AG, YOU SO CRAZY.
SHIT JUST GOT REAL
Agoney — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 06:40SHIT JUST GOT REAL
Did it just turn into a
Shihli — Tue, 04/27/2010 - 06:48Did it just turn into a Martin Lawrence movie in here?
The theme song to "martin"
Agoney — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 12:51The theme song to "martin" just popped into my head.. hahahaa
Yea that's never gonna
saedo — Mon, 04/26/2010 - 13:09Yea that's never gonna happen.
Every one of those things, for better or worse, is targetting the "casual" players. They want 12 million players, not just the 2 (or less, probably much less) million "hard core" that kick started this game. So either have to work with it, or just bask in the memories of the "glory days".
But yes, it seems probably for most, the logistics of a 25 man won't be worth it if they can do it all the same in the 10 man. Unless they happened to have that amount willing to gun for it.
One side point of interest, for those with shitty systems that get shitty frame rates when 25 players are pew pewing at the same time... This 10 man thing might actually make them look decent...
Unless it's a water zone with
Pelana — Wed, 04/28/2010 - 12:57Unless it's a water zone with the updated water effects. Then it'll be suck as usual.