Why not 15-man raids? A possible compromise

Lets face it. Having two different sizes of raids is going to be a complete pain in the neck for Blizzard to balance in Cataclysm. It’s going to be an even bigger pain in the neck for guild officers or PUG raid leaders who have to sift through an unforgiving & horrible recruitment system to fill their raids. Even with possible improvements for recruitment, 2 raid sizes are just not a good idea. Segregation of raiders into 10 & 25-mans is never going to work right, and is always going to be plagued with problems (and it’s going to be the players who suffer for Blizzard’s huge mistakes).  It’s still early enough in development for them to scrap 10′s & 25′s altogether. What they should do is just have one raid size: 15-mans.

Why should we have only 15-man raids? Well, because it will be better for the game.

  • 25 is really just a pain in the neck to lead & organize, even though it has a great larger-scale feel.  Especially with not having any real significant rewards to convince players to join 25-man raiding guilds in Cata, there is really no point to keeping 25-mans alive. They are just going to die a slow & painful death, at the expense of polarizing the community and creating problems that the game will never recover from.
  • 10-mans are equally hard to organize, but easier to lead. Keeping up the perfect roster for 10-mans is really not that much better than 25′s, because your ratio of raiders to backups has to be more skewed (ie. you need to bench at least 1 tank, DPS, & healer every week as backup replacements, or if 2 people leave the guild it’s a big deal).
  • 10-mans don’t have an epic enough feel to keep the whole player-base happy, which is really the only reason why they want to keep around 25-mans. In addition, 10-man raids promote class homogenization, in a way that 15-mans don’t have to (because in 15′s, it’s easier to have 1 of each class, with room for a couple doubles).
  • Keeping 2 raid sizes in Cata is a huge mistake, because they are going to be impossible to balance right, and make recruitment harder for both sizes of raids.
  • A raid size of 15 allows more DPS into the ranks, so that you can have something like: 2 tanks, 3 heals, & 10 DPS. It keeps a happier tank-heal-DPS ratio, and will prevent having wide-spread tank & healer shortages compared to having most guilds trying to recruit tanks & healers for their 10-mans after all but the most hard-core 25′s implode and disband in Cata.

Please, Blizzard. Separate but equal raids will not work. I really don’t want to have to waste an entire new expansion on an experiment that I have already predicted failure for. Separate but equal 10′s & 25′s running simultaneously is a horrible idea, and I would rather lose both sizes for the sake of keeping the player base from tearing each other apart in the long run. Adopting one raid size (15-man) is really something that will allow everyone to win, because it will reduce the amount of frustration & burn-out in the community by not spreading recruitment too thin between the various types of raiding guilds. Homogenize raid size, and reduce the homogenization of everything else in the game. As someone who still misses 40-man raids, this is something I’m willing to support, just so that the game can come out stronger and not have so much competition & segregation between factions of different types of raiders.

Once again, Separate but equal isn’t going to work. Blizzard needs to pick one raid size & stick with it, with 15 being the best compromise number.

This entry was posted in Cataclysm. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

45 Comments

  1. Posted April 28, 2010 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    I think the trouble with any fixed raid size is that what works nicely for one social group is not going to work well for another. I like 5 mans also, and it sucks when you have 6 players want to go, but 7 players would be too much work to get together for a dungeon (LFD tool notwithstanding.)

    15-20 man would be perfect for my guild NOW, but in 3 weeks time we might be going through rotation issues once again – 32 people for 25 spots was regular. We’re all in this guild because of the guild culture and leader, and while 25 mans are an ass, we prefer doing it because it includes more people. 10 mans are the main source of drama in our guild, because they become exclusive instead of inclusive.

    I’m not convinced that 15 people would be inclusive enough for our community.

  2. Lissanna
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 9:47 am | Permalink

    If all 32 people logged in, you could still field two 15′s. if you fluxed back down to 20 people, you could do one 15.

  3. Posted April 28, 2010 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    Well, again – that still leaves us with two sets of 15 people who potentially end up raiding without the people they want to raid with.

    25 is just as limited, in its own way, when it is compared with raiding 40s. Part of my issue with raiding 10s (I much prefer 25s) is that I’ll be in a different group to some of my close friends, due to ‘group balance’ and the limited role spots. I remember when I was levelling as a healer – I never met any other healers, whereas 25 mans gives you a mini-community of healers.

    It’s always a balancing act, but I don’t see how 15 would really be anymore ‘epic’ than 10s. It just seems like a middle ground – harder to organise and slightly more epic, but still not as epic as 25s and easier to organise.

    Different ratios of those two factors will naturally be different for different communities. I think it would be a good idea to see a middleground between the two options, but it shouldn’t be the only option.

  4. Posted April 28, 2010 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    I disagree wholeheartedly that 10-man raids don’t have an epic feel. And, I also disagree that 10-man raids are just as difficult to organize. I have been a leader or officer since Molten Core was new. So I’ve been through every possible raid size and have experienced the evolution of wow raiding.

    The beauty of the 10-man size is this:

    1. A much more epic feel than 5-mans. You are now on a real team rather than in a small party.

    2. You can have a small guild of people you know by first name. People who you can genuinely say are friends — not just game acquaintances.

    Once you creep up to even 15-mans for the raid size, a guild will HAVE to grow into something that’s no longer intimate. You have to have random people you can’t tolerate but need to complete your team. That’s exactly what you had to have to sustain a 40-man raid team. And, it’s still what you need to sustain a 25-man raid team.

    Many of us really don’t want to be a part of that scene anymore. And I, for one, wish others could somehow understand this. Some of us have moved beyond loot and ego and just want to enjoy challenging content in a setting that involves a more intimate-sized team. One that doesn’t require random dBags to “fill slots”.

  5. Posted April 28, 2010 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    I’m usually a fan of all things doom and gloom. Heck, I tend to be quite the pessimist on my blog. But I find it strange here (perhaps because you are such a cheery soul usually!)

    I don’t think a 15 man will satisfy either group. If I had to back down from 25s to 15s, I’d definitely notice the lack of scope and scale across the group. If I had to step up from 10′s to 15′s, I’d feel that my small group had lost some of its intimacy and comfort.

    Of course, I don’t agree with many people that this will be the death of 25′s either. So my perspective is somewhat biased here.

    At any rate, it certainly is an interesting suggestion, even if it is one I feel Blizzard would be reluctant to adopt.

  6. Nimizar
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:06 am | Permalink

    I don’t see Blizz messing with 10-mans. If 25 mans don’t prove popular enough without the bribery of the best PvE gear in the game, then the most likely outcome is for them to eventually get the chop rather than Blizzard messing with both 10-man and 25-man guilds by creating yet another raid size.

    The other virtue of 10 man raids is that their ratios are actually very similar to those of a 5 man group (the only difference is that you will often run with 5 DPS and 3 healers, instead of 6 and 2, but the latter format happens as well, particularly for overgeared content)

    Regardless, I still stand by my last comment on the other post:
    - yes, some 25-man guilds will collapse over this
    - yes, the people that were only doing 25 mans for the higher level loot will bail in favour of the easier to organise 10 man raids
    - but, the 25-man guilds that remain standing will be far more pleasant places, containing people that are there simply because they prefer the larger raid format

    The other thing to keep in mind is that with shared lockouts and shorter individual raids, guilds with variable raid rosters will have greater freedom in doing different sized runs. Maybe one night they have 20 people and do parallel 10-man runs of one of the raid instances in a tier, but have the full 25 to run the other raid instance on a different night. Then the third night they’re down to 10 and go back and do a hard mode run from the previous tier instead.

    I do think an important part of making this work is going to be making sure that the previous tier’s hard modes are comparable in difficulty and loot rewards to the current tier’s normal modes, as well as making sure that each tier includes more than one raid instance.

  7. Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Seriously, I think you’re freaking out over nothing. Everything is horrible, and clearly raids will die out, just like they have been predicted to die out for every. single. major. expansion.

    Just because you’ve predicted the death of raiding doesn’t mean it will come to pass, and I’m pretty sure that Blizzard doesn’t believe it will, or they wouldn’t be proceeding as planned.

    Maybe your 10-mans don’t feel epic, but that same “no tolerance for error” that people rail against is exactly what makes it challenging and exciting.

    The reason people raid 25 mans isn’t because they “feel more epic” – you yourself say they’re going to die because you don’t think a few extra pieces of loot, extra gold, and extra badges is enough to make it survive. Says to me that people aren’t doing it for the epic feel so much as the badges, or they’d do it anyway (which I think they will, mind you).

    I realize you’re still freaking out. I think we have it pretty good.

  8. Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    @Nimizar

    Here is the problem we are trying to solve.

    Day 1: Have 25 – cool everyone go do 25 man.
    Day 2: Something came up only have 22.
    Option 1 – PuG or rotate in 3 from back ups. Backups now are locked out of any boss killed from previous raid. FU back up people or PUGs.
    Option 2 – Do 10 man version, FU 12 extra people you don’t get a chance at any boss we kill in the 10 because it is the same Raid ID.

    If you think you have seen loot drama now you have not seen anything yet. Welcome to (Raid ID Drama)^2.

    All of these social problems come from poor raid system design. Raid IDs are a major problem. They should not be based on characters or players.

    Some other in game “fix” needs to be created to contain the raid ID. Make it cost 10K-20K gold and can be a personal or guild possession. Then when a raid is formed a new item can be used to contain the raid ID or an old one can be applied to continue.

    We need to find ways to give more options as a whole not a choice between who to screw over due to poor grouping mechanics in a vain attempt to slow down the “hardcore” raiders.

  9. Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:44 am | Permalink

    Essentially if anyone is going to get screwed by the system everyone should be equally. And the new shared Raid ID for both 10 and 25 does not do that.

  10. Shroomkin
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    In my opinion the writing is on the wall. The future will be variable-sized instances; other games already have this implemented in various degrees, and Blizzard has been steadily heading towards the “support all styles/sizes of gameplay” design.

    That way you can do any instance with any number of people you want. “Too hard to balance”? Hogwash, in my opinion. 10 years ago it was “just flat out not possible” to do so many different and new ideas in the mmo genre, yet Blizzard broke down so many of those dogmatic walls. And succeeded.

    Anyways, my point is clear and Ill call it now. The future of WoW (indeed, all mmos) will be variable-sized instances.

    • Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:50 am | Permalink

      Finally someone has said it. Yes this is the only real way to handle any of these issues.

      Raid/Dungeon/Group it matters not. Form up and go should be the way to go.

  11. Arielle
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:51 am | Permalink

    Blizzard has proven in the past that they can balance a 10m raid around 10m obtainable gear and still make it difficult (ZA).

    Also, a 15m raid format would probably end up being 3 tanks, 4 healers, and 8 dps.

    10 & 25 can work just fine. And if enough noise is made during beta, they might kill the Shared Lockout thing. They have been known to change their mind on those sorts of things.

  12. Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    @Shroomkin I don’t see variable-sized instances working in wow. Too many encounters require X number of people to “stand here” and “do that” to make it work with random-sized groups. It would be interesting to see them try though — and potentially frustrating. It would mean a total shift in encounter design philosophy. It would also probably mean removing a lot of what’s interesting about encounters for the sake of making it easy to balance.

  13. Wyxx
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    /sarcasm on

    Why not just have everything be 5-man content? Aren’t the people who aren’t able to play enough to pug a raid or join a guild entitled to have access to all the gear that everyone else does? For that matter, why don’t they just make everything soloable?

    /sarcasm off

    In MMOs, we’ve gone from 72(EQ) man raids, to 40 man raids, to 25 man raids. Where does it stop! Part of the challenge of raid content is being able to coordinate people. All of these changes simply make things easier.

    The easier Blizzard makes things, the more they cheapen the feeling of accomplishment that comes from success. They obviously want to appeal to more of the masses who either don’t have the time, game skill or social skills to get in a decent guild and succeed. However, they’re going to start losing people to whom this is an important part of playing the game.

  14. Lissanna
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    Wyxx – Well, I’ve already predicted that the # of 25-man guilds is going to drop severely (with 25-man raiding guilds withering away to maybe 1 to 3 guilds per server within a year of Cata going live), and that the 10-man raiding is going to gradually become the norm (with 25′s probably being obliterated entirely by the expansion after Cata. So, I’m trying to increase the norm from 10 back up to 15 as what I see as a better compromise than letting 25′s die from attrition over time. The death of 25′s wont be immediate, and they won’t die away completely – they’re just going to attrition down to a very small number of incredibly hard-core 25-man raiders, at the expense of the people who want to do more casual 25-man raids (like myself). I’m trying to keep bigger raid sizes than just the 10′s that are going to increase A LOT in popularity in Cata, rather than letting WoW raiding wither into smaller & smaller group sizes.

  15. Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:22 am | Permalink

    I definitely agree that the class homogenization is a sad product of trying to make 10-mans easier to organize. I don’t like it. I prefer having classes be distinct. It makes recruiting a PitA, but it feels more dynamic and special when I have this battle res, and the shaman has her bloodlust, and the ret pally can go OMG-OP-BEACON heals offspec for niche fights. I might be a minority, though, in being willing to swap raiders around mid-instance for specific boss fights. It’s a difficulty I enjoy.

    I love my tens, but I don’t like the homogenization :(

  16. Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    Ya and the saddest part of all of this is why has it gone smaller and smaller to make it easier to get groups. Because in the game tools to organize people suck.

    There needs to be out of game organization tools and Blizzard has never made those. It has been left of too a community of mostly volunteers to produce most of the tools we use to socialize and organize outside the game.

    For example EVE Online is creating a entire social website for their game that has links to in game mail and some other information only based tools. To help corporations and players communicate and share information.

    That is the real failure on Blizzards part over the years is they have not done nearly anything to make the logistics of raiding better or easier for the community. With the Battle.net rewrite there is some hope coming but I really think it will be too little too late for WoW.

    The other thing that annoys me is I am sick of being a tester for them. Pick a mechanic and either live or die by it. But having the community adjust to different raid mechanics each and every content patch is bullshit.

    Now their MMO-2.0 that is unnamed I am sure is going to kick as considering we have been in “alpha” for it since tBC.

  17. Maor
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:45 am | Permalink

    I personally think that 25 man guilds will be perfectly fine. Will some die? Sure, but I don’t think it’s going to be as bad as anyone here is claiming it’s going to be.

  18. Mushu
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

    I hate the homogenization that has been happening over the years in WoW. The game is feeling more diluted and generic and, dare I say it, less “epic” with every patch. Pretty soon there will be no more compelling reason to keep my account open, and other games will soon be competing for my hard-earned monthly money.

    The issue that no one seems to bring up and is at the heart of this debacle is how Blizz keeps f’ing everything up just from simple experimentation of the system! What ever happened to the maxim “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it!”? HEY BLIZZ: IT WILL NEVER BE PERFECT PLEASE JUST ACCEPT THAT FACT AND LET US PLAY THE GAME! I wish they’d stop treating this epic gamimg system as if it was a giant test tube by trying new stuff constantly just to see what happens in such a grand scale. I hate being a rat in a cage, poked and prodded, taunted with carrots and punished with nerfs.

    @Scarvo – you don’t seem to get the problem here. Why did Blizz feel it was necessary to combine all raid id’s?? It’s because they CAN’T SLOW DOWN PROGRESSION FAST ENOUGH and they don’t have the time or resources (or desire, imo) to make enough content between releases to keep players happy/busy enough to not cancel accounts for several months at a time.

    @Lavata – you actually get the main point in the entire situation, bravo! I have always felt like I was simply a test subject in some giant social experiment. Leave the sh!t alone and let us play the damn game for God’s sake!

  19. Maor
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    I find the thing about testing kind of amusing simply because changing mechanics every patch is something they’ve always done. Maybe not the same mechanics they do now, but they certainly change them enough in the past that you think you’d be used to them.

  20. Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

    I agree wholeheartedly that the single raid ID system will probably be the death of 25 man raiding.

    What I’d actually like to see happen is to eliminate the 25 man raid altogether, and have a 10 man raid and a 40 man raid, on separate IDs, where the 40 man has better iLvl.

    Doing this lets you get a good balance of content accessibility for casuals and difficult challenges for the hardcore crowd.

  21. Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    Passionate yes! It is a bit dramatic though. I understand you like the “feel” of 25s, but does that feeling justify more reward? Sure there is a lot of work in running a successful 25 man raiding guild. You do the work to RUN the raid, the reward is being able to run it. The reward should not be a falsely inflated iLvL.

    http://www.gtfootf.com

    Cozmo

    • Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:48 pm | Permalink

      Ok where does it talk about rewards?

      Seriously we are discussing the logistics problem with 10 and 25 sharing the same ID. Specifically how this punishes 25 man oriented guilds.

      Lets be honest very very few 25 man raid guilds have exactly 25 people in them. With the current separate raid IDs those that are not rotated into the main 25 usually are taken in a guild 10 made up of a mix of people who were and were not in the main 25 man run for the week.

      So now Blizzard is saying no you don’t have to feel like you have to run both the 10 and 25 man each week to stay even. We want you to run and keep 2 characters at the same gear level all the time so that logistically you can do then what is simple to do now.

      • Posted April 28, 2010 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

        Furthermore Blizzard needs to seperate the concept of the following:

        Logistics
        Difficulty
        Gear or Rewards

        Why we can’t just raid the same instance killing the same 1 boss 7 times a week is beyond me. Especially if there is going to be a “point cap” per week.

        If there is a point limit per week on top of the asshole-ish 1 raid per week per character it is a joke. Just make everything point based like in PvP and be done with it. Oh but then we know why it is because of the “one armed bandit” reward system that has kept the game going for so long.

        So here is the way to do it. Make the lottery loot like the blue bag at the end of Occulus. Have give a flag that you only can get 1 per week. Make all gear BoE from the bag. Let the free market and guild social cohesion distribute the loot. Then you don’t need raid ID lock outs. Just the instance ID for sake of saving progress.

        Hell if we are going to completely screw up and change the system lets forget these baby steps. Lets get some radical change in there and actually explore the reward system solution space.

  22. Kaug
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    I’ve thought for some time that the 10m format should have been 15m from day 1 of Wrath. IMO,. the biggest reason 10s are so much easier and therefor have lesser loot is because of size. With 10m you can’t assume every buff. If you run a 10m with good buff balance and one without and\or missing heroism the difference is night and day. When TOC was new and most of our gear was ~about the right level for it doing Anub without a heroism was idiotic and the balance of the rest of your raid buffs could take the fight from hard to impossible. By going up to 15 players you can reasonably get all your raid buffs every time, so blizz can tune the encounter assuming all your buffs are up. It also seems to lend itself to the bring the player thing, as with 15 you can afford to bring a player or two with mostly\all duplicate buffs, even once the encounters are tuned.

    Assuming that doesn’t happen, i hope they reverse the shared raid lockout. If they want to limit how many badges you can get per week etc, i’m ok with that. But making them both use same raid id will be a huge pain and in the long run kill most 25m

  23. Posted April 28, 2010 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

    I agree that variable size instances are the way to go, but 10-mans are almost too small to allow variation. The issue is that the encounter designers still need to be able to rely on something (e.g. having at least 2 tanks, having at least three people pressing buttons scattered around the room, etc.) in order to make interesting encounters. So, in 25-man, you could see allowing 20-30 people in. The base mechanics would stay the same, but boss damage and health would scale depending on the number of people in the raid.

    In 10-man, that gets tricky. You would probably work with 9-11 or 9-12 people, but once you drop to 8 people it starts to get really tricky to make any assumptions about group composition when you’re designing your encounters.

    However, they could use the introduction of scaling to push 10-man up to 15, and have two raid sizes: 10-15 and 20-30. I suppose that, if they are planning on keeping encounter mechanics the same in each size (i.e. no need for mind control or anything like that), they would just merge everything at that point and allow you to raid with 10 to 30 people.

    The tricky part would be figuring out how much loot should drop. There would be certain raid sizes that would be suboptimal because the addition of one more raider would result in an extra drop. I doubt anyone but the hardcore guilds would care about this, however.

    Balancing would be hard (some encounters would be easier with certain numbers of people, especially those where the boss, e.g., gains health each time someone dies), but I think the benefits outweigh the fact that it wouldn’t be perfectly balanced. The world-first guilds can figure out their perfect 17-man team for boss 1 and 19-man for boss 2, but the rest of us will just enjoy being able to raid with whoever happens to be online.

  24. Posted April 28, 2010 at 3:53 pm | Permalink

    Ya I was saying something similar to Lissanna the other day.

    Design the instance for 10 or 25 and just remove the limit to a strict 10 and 25 15-20 & 30-40.

    The question is what is the benefit for doing it at the strict 10 & 25 if you can use 20 in an instance design for 10.

    The one form of play that I like that blizzard does not seem to like is outgearing an instance and blowing it to hell and back with AoE and massive single target dps. I find ROFLstomping instances and raids fun and normal tuned instances a pain in the ass. I am going in to have fun not beat my head against a wall until it bleeds for weeks.

  25. Mushu
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

    Something no one has mentioned yet is this:

    How many “utility” spec toons will be in any of the good (not even mentioning top) 10-man raiding groups? Since boomys, ele shammys, and others are not designed to top the meters why even bring them? When there are only 5 or 6 dps spots open and if, as they say, the 10-mans will be “very” hard, then why would a guild gimp its output? This again pushes us back to vanilla where utility spec toons were few and far between in good raiding guilds.

    25′s give a depth of flexibility that 10′s can never hope to match.

    /sad

  26. Lissanna
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

    Mushu – In my 10-man team, I play “utility” hybrid in one specific way: I DPS when we only need 2 healers, and then I heal on fights in ICC when we need 3. Being good (or at least competent) in both roles has helped me secure a spot in terms of being useful for whatever my guild needs in our 10′s.

    However, I CAN do the same thing in our 25′s (where I can switch from DPS to being the 6th healer on more healing intensive fights).

  27. Nimizar
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 5:23 pm | Permalink

    If you get 25 one night and 22 the next, you’re still hosed *right now*. You can’t continue with your 25-man run, so you’re forced to split into two separate 10-man runs (and 2 people still miss out).

    Cataclysm doesn’t change that, it only makes it so that instead of running the same instance the 25-man raid was doing, the 10-man runs you split into will either head to the other raid on the current tier, or else do hard modes from the previous tier. (Again, keeping in mind that for 25-man hard mode guilds, the gear disparity in going back to the previous tier will be no larger than the gear disparity they currently suffer stepping down to 10-man raids).

    As far as the raid lockout implementation being lousy goes, I have no disagreement with that, I just object to it being used as an objection to shared 10/25 lockouts. Separate 10/25 runs is a terrible workaround for the fact that raid lockouts aren’t per-boss in some fashion. My own suggestion for an improved lockout implementation is allowing toons to be saved to multiple raid IDs for the same raid each week, but not being eligible for loot drops if they have already killed a given boss that week on any of their saved IDs (regardless of group size or boss difficulty). They may need a cap of 3-5 total saved raid IDs per character to put a limit on the selling of slots in farming runs, but the the gear available for purchase and the stockpiling cap would limit the value of hero points earned, and the weekly cap would directly limit the valor points earned. That way people can generally rerun an instance if they have non-loot related reasons for doing so (i.e. running with their friends), while not having players feel obliged to run them multiple times in order to maintain a competitive rate of progression.

    If the rate of loot acquisition in 25-man runs is enough faster than it is in 10-man runs, then 25′s *will* remain the competitive PvE battlefield, because more gear faster will make it easier to down the bosses later in the instance. Then again, 10-mans may suffer less “loot loss” through people leaving the raid, so the rate of gear acquisition for the raid as a whole may remain more stable. As I posted on the Blizzard forums, the only potential mistake I see in the whole thing is the removal of the distinction between 10 and 25 man raiding achievements, but even that objection depends on implementation details (e.g. one of the “achieve X or Y” style achievements would be fine – the separate 10/25 subachievements would at least still be tracked, even though you wouldn’t get extra points for doing both).

  28. Nimizar
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

    One clarification about my post: I meant a possible limit of 3-5 saved raid IDs per character per raid. An overall limit of 3-5 saved raid IDs per character would be an absolutely terrible idea.

  29. t0xic
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

    Wow. So much positive energy.

    Blizz is giving us a lot to digest. Keep chewing your food and wait until the meal is over before you decide if you liked it or not.

  30. Lissanna
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

    Toxic – this is what Beta season in WoW is like. We have to nitpick every change, and suggest changes we think would be better. ;)

  31. Fangtastic
    Posted April 28, 2010 at 11:15 pm | Permalink

    Speaking as a tank, one thing that has me happy about the move to 10 mans is that it will be awesome for tanks.

    One of the reasons for the tank shortage in wow is that your ratio of 1:5 (one tank for a group of five) scales to 10 man raids but not to 25s. There are no fights that need 5 proper tanks.

    This move to 10 mans has the potential to open up the “career path” for tanks through the entire expansion. So when you roll a tank, you know the sort of demand there is for you while leveling and in old content is going to persist in the endgame.

    Very excited about this aspect. :-)

  32. Posted April 29, 2010 at 1:14 am | Permalink

    Why not have adjustable raid sizes?

    10 up to 24 players

    25 up to 40 players

    Raid difficulty is adjusted based on number in the raid – therefore you can’t just tack someone on.

    My understanding is that Diablo works in this fashion – monsters get harder to kill as more people enter the world, and easier as people leave. The technology/coding is there already. That way if you have 30 people show up for a 25 man, and they’re geared, you just add them in – make use of offspecs as needed for proper raid balance and continue! Or if you have 15 show up, just run a scaled up 10 man – with loot being equal in both in Cata, this would seem ideal! Number of drops scales with people etc.

  33. Arielle
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 2:57 am | Permalink

    @Lis: I would agree with you, if a Beta was even available.

  34. Nimizar
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    @Arielle: I suspect Blizz have learned from their experience with the WotLK info site during the Wrath F&F alpha. Because the alpha was still under NDA, Blizz lost control of the way a lot of the new (frequently datamined) information was presented.

    This time around, it looks like they’re trying to pre-announce a lot of the big changes so that they can better control the way they’re presented and provide some guidance for the subsequent discussion.

  35. Arielle
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    @Nimizar: That’s all well and good (and I kinda agree with it), but it doesn’t mean everyone should go preaching DOOM&GLOOM without knowing basically anything about what will actually be happening.

  36. Lissanna
    Posted April 29, 2010 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    Arielle – Posting suggestions of things that should be improved is what I do during this time in the game’s cycle – but usually I would just be posting about druid stuff that everyone agreed with.

    This particular post isn’t so much of a Doom & Gloom post as putting into words what some people have been asking Blizzard to do for a while. This post is particularly more productive than my QQ post from a couple days ago because it asks for something (15-man raids) that isn’t even on Blizzard’s current radar & gives reasons why.

    My goal is also to get you guys talking, and I can tell just from the # of comments, and people commenting, that this is an issue that people want to talk about. :)

  37. Posted April 29, 2010 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

    I think it’s far too early to tell how these changes really will play out. As a person who likes 10s more than 25s, I’m overjoyed, since there will no longer be any reason to put up with the morons, idiots and jerks who fill the last three spots in any 25-man raid. But there are some things that will influence how big a hit this will be on people who prefer 25s.

    For instance, how many raids will be open per point expansion in Cata? The whole of WotLK has involved epic-style raids — first Naxx, then Ulduar, then ToC (in a more limited sense), and then ICC. If you wanted the latest gear and loot, you ran only the current raid, and it didn’t make much sense to go back to earlier runs. The problem with this setup is that, for instance, if you lock yourself to a 25-man Naxx-equivalent, you end up with nothing to do if the next day you only have 22. But if instead of the current system, Cata brings with it several smaller raids per patch, there’s more flexibility and you can run one on 25 and the others on 10 without the raid size presenting a real problem.

    There are other examples of how other changes to the game will interact with raid sizes, and that prevents me from definitively predicting the death of 25s or the like. It’s why I usually have a wait and see attitude toward the whole thing. Keep this change in mind as Blizzard announces new changes. It will be interesting to see how those changes interact, much more interesting I think than predicting the effect of any single change.

  38. Posted April 29, 2010 at 7:39 pm | Permalink

    I’m not sure whether I agree or disagree with all that’s being debated about the proposed raid progression changes.

    I’m coming from a military background where committing to a raid schedule is next to impossible and I find myself having to pug a LOT of 10-man runs. And there’s quite a few of us in that same position. We can’t raid, we PUG when we can and try to gather up a the few scraps we can get to keep us close to (but never exceeding) the level of those who CAN raid.

    Accessibility is the key theme with these changes that date back as far as Burning Crusade. The hardcores will hate it because it robs them of their “leet” status when they can’t be the only ones to have downed a certain boss or obtain a certain piece of loot.

    But the bottomline for Blizz is the casuals. There are more of them. They keep the lights on, so catering to them is a no-brainer. This means…

    1. Making raids accessible by maintaining their size and homogenizing the classes so that you can play with whom you wish and not ONLY because of their buffs or utility.
    2. Putting it on the same lockout so that everyone can experience the same content with similar (but not exactly the same) challenges…
    3. …which means offering the same loot. Why should *I* as a casual (not by choice) be penalized in gearing because I can’t participate in a 25man? Blizz is only making these changes because there are a LOT of casuals but also because they’ve been quite vocal about accessibility to the point where Blizz is actually making the changes to appease (because it threatens the bottomline when you don’t appease the masses).

    Are you an elitist snob because you want to separate the gearing and lockouts? No, not at all, BUT a good number of the people fighting these changes are, and that’s what makes the debate hard to swallow. I’m being hated on because I can’t raid in a 25man, but I still want to see as much of the game and bosses as I can and receive the same rewards. It seems very clear to me that the casuals who partake in the 10mans and PUGs will still take a bit longer to reap the rewards that apparently will be plentiful in a 25man raid, but I don’t have a problem with this.

    I think it’s ironic that a majority of the people fighting this are (with exception to a number of people who frequent this blog and Lissanna herself) the upper echelon of raiders who can down the final boss of a raid within days, if not hours, of a Boss going live. What does it matter to them? They finish the raids quicker, they get gear quicker, do heroic versions quicker…but agian, that’s only two-percent of the player base…the rest of us want a chance and this is one way to help us achieve that. We’re ALL paying customers to the game, lest we forget that.

    Oi-vey…I didn’t mean to ramble on. My thoughts are everywhere on this.

  39. Fencepost
    Posted May 1, 2010 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

    15 mans would be interesting, at the moment in 10 mans more and more raids are 2 healing 10 mans so 3 in 15 with 2 tanks could work well while leaving morea spots for dps, there will always be more dps than healers and tanks so having a few more spots for them while keeping the healer tank ratio about the same would be great.

  40. Nimizar
    Posted May 2, 2010 at 1:31 am | Permalink

    @Askevar: autoscaling works in Diablo because the fights generally aren’t all that technical from a group dynamics point of view – you don’t really have a tank vs healer vs DPS distinction. Instead it’s always a matter of damage dealt vs damage taken on a personal basis.

    WoW on the other hand has lots of boss mechanics which are very dependent on group size, and closely related to class roles. (e.g. tank swaps, tank and healer CD rotations, burst DPS phases, add management, randomly targeted abilities, AoE raid damage). Those don’t scale cleanly with group size and need to be designed with a specific number of people in mind.

  41. CTsmith
    Posted May 3, 2010 at 1:26 am | Permalink

    WoW Brown v Board of Education! Seperate but equal is unconstitutional to Azeroth!

  42. lady tienne
    Posted May 4, 2010 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    I think 10 man is necesarry. Its about progression and developing players which is Blizzard’s bread and butter. Taking people from 5 man dungeon content to 15 man raiding is a bit of stretch. Ten man fills that gap and teaches vital abilities. However, the hardcore gamer needs something epic and a 20 or 25 man field is worth it. The rewards should be higher, because it is harder to do 25 man raids both in terms of organizing and the pure run. Remember those days of AQ40 and having world events. It sad that we dont have those at level anymore. Most players don’t even realize the challenge that existed in battling between the factions and gaining attunements. Dropping content or down grading teams because its too hard or challenging seems somehow flawed as the end game play is about becoming epic.