WoW - March to Gnomer

[Kalbear]

Why would they do 10s when 25s drop more loot per week?

They said 25s would be "more efficient" so you are probably looking at like 5/6 items and 2 badges or something per 25 man boss versus like 2 items and 1 badge per 10 man boss.

You get extra for herding them cats and gear up faster. Also, a better chance at the items you want.

Not necessarily. While you're going to get a better shot at loot from a boss you can do, you'll get 0% chance at loot on a boss you can't. When things are on farm this doesn't matter, but most guilds could very easily form a core of 10-12 people that could mow down 10-man progression when not having to carry another 10-15 people.

And if those people can progress quickly and get better gear from bosses down the system, why would they care if the other guildies don't get gear? It's more efficient for a guild as a whole to do 25 man, but it's way more efficient for individual players to do 10 man if they can go further in the instance.

[Shryke]

Not necessarily. While you're going to get a better shot at loot from a boss you can do, you'll get 0% chance at loot on a boss you can't. When things are on farm this doesn't matter, but most guilds could very easily form a core of 10-12 people that could mow down 10-man progression when not having to carry another 10-15 people.

And if those people can progress quickly and get better gear from bosses down the system, why would they care if the other guildies don't get gear? It's more efficient for a guild as a whole to do 25 man, but it's way more efficient for individual players to do 10 man if they can go further in the instance.

If you can't progress in 25 man, switch to 10 man for the bosses you can't get past. They said:

However, in the same way that you can decide on a per-boss basis whether to try normal vs. hard mode, we might allow you to change between 10 and 25 on a per-encounter basis for additional flexibility. If you started a raid in 25-player mode and then found that you couldn’t get everyone together later in the week, you might be able to downsize the next few bosses to 10-player.

And this assumes 25s will be harder to progress in then 10s. Right now 25s are tuned for a higher gear level. This will not be true in Cataclysm.

And there's still a better chance at loot for the individual player. More loot means your piece is more likely to drop.

[Kymeera]

Why would they do 10s when 25s drop more loot per week?

They said 25s would be "more efficient" so you are probably looking at like 5/6 items and 2 badges or something per 25 man boss versus like 2 items and 1 badge per 10 man boss.

You get extra for herding them cats and gear up faster. Also, a better chance at the items you want.

Why herd cats and have to gear up 15 more people when you can run things more efficiently with your clique? Honestly, how many 25 person guilds are made up of people who all like each other? Every guild I've ever been in has a clique of better players who resent the lesser players, but stay together because there's no better alternative. Now those cliques can tell the rest to piss off because they are no longer needed to gain the best gear.

[Shryke]

Why herd cats and have to gear up 15 more people when you can run things more efficiently with your clique?

Except, again, they can't because they've stated they want to design 25s to be more efficient.

Honestly, how many 25 person guilds are made up of people who all like each other? Every guild I've ever been in has a clique of better players who resent the lesser players, but stay together because there's no better alternative. Now those cliques can tell the rest to piss off because they are no longer needed to gain the best gear.

And this is a problem?

Shit, the issue you talk about here is EXACTLY why they are doing this. They don't WANT you to be forced to run 25s if you don't want to.

[Kalbear]

And this assumes 25s will be harder to progress in then 10s. Right now 25s are tuned for a higher gear level. This will not be true in Cataclysm.

Gear, schmear. I'm talking about most guilds.

Most guilds have something like 10-15 good players, 5 meh players, and 5-10 mouthbreathers. If you take the 10 good players vs 10 mouthbreathers, the good players will steamroll the 10-man content and the mouthbreathers will fail over and over again. Same content, largely same gear, even 'good' comps. They'll just suck.

Which means that that 10-man group can go places.

Now, as a group that 25-man group is pretty meh. But as a 10-man? They're hawt. So do you just do what you can in 25 man, and then tell the suck people to sit down for a while and let the big boys handle it? Yeah, that's going to go well - cause all of those 25 players think they're hot shit. Who decides who goes? Who gets that gear? Do you try and make two 'balanced' 10 man groups to try and progress further and have half the good players in one or the other, and have neither group succeed?

That's what we have already in WotLK with 10-man shit. It's a huge headache and a huge source of drama. It sucks balls.

Now, there's a way to make this work, which is to assume that the 25 man raids are made up like the above and tune appropriately. In which case, the 10-mans are going to be hard, the 25 mans are going to be easy. Which is another problem; if 25 mans are too easy, the hardcore guilds will simply stop playing or caring as much. Or they'll rather be 'challenged' by 10-man raids instead, and everyone will start seeing 10-mans as the 'real' progression mark. Another chink in the armor for 25-mans.

Either way, I think you're going to see a lot of people embrace the 10-man raid - simply because they'd rather play with a select group of friends and/or really good players instead of carrying a bunch of people or dealing with attitudes of folks they don't like.

[Shryke]

You are right in that it will probably see the end of people who hate 25s but do them for the gear.

Frankly, I welcome this.

[Kalbear]

Except, again, they can't because they've stated they want to design 25s to be more efficient.

From a loot perspective. NOt from an organizational one, which is what Kymeera was talking about.

And this is a problem?

Shit, the issue you talk about here is EXACTLY why they are doing this. They don't WANT you to be forced to run 25s if you don't want to.

It's not necessarily a problem. But it will obliterate a lot of 25-man guilds and change raiding as we know it. That might not be bad or good, it's just change.

Still, one can be sad for seeing the death of 25-man raiding. Even if it sucked some times and was frustrating as hell, it was also fun at times.

[Kymeera]

And this is a problem?

Shit, the issue you talk about here is EXACTLY why they are doing this. They don't WANT you to be forced to run 25s if you don't want to.

It's not exactly a problem, but it's not a very good solution. I remember when raids in EQ were capped at 72. Enter vanilla WoW with a 40 person cap. Then we're down to a 25 or occasionally 10 person cap. Now everything comes in both 25 and 10. Each size has its pros and cons, but it's nice to have the option of doing only a 10, only a 25, or both. If you currently hate 25s and don't want to run them, don't run them. Whoever is forcing themselves to run 25s week after week just to have the best gear in the game should probably step back and reassess things. It's a game. It should be fun. If you're not having fun do something else.

I just don't like how they're limiting our choices.

[Zadok]

It's not so much about hating 25s as hating the idiots you have to group with in order to fill out a raid. Obviously this isn't going to change much for the top end guilds that can put together a solid team but like Kal said for mediocre guilds with a solid core of 10 players this is going to be huge.

[Weak With The Dawn]

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!

I'm thinking Shryke may be right about the more "points/badges" idea he's got.

[Shryke]

I like that change too. Although I worry about the cap on Valor points effecting the viability of 25-man raids.

[Poobah]

Hopefully the Valor cap will be (number of end tier bosses)*(number of emblems they will drop on 25 man).

And I agree this is going to create massive drama. It's not just a case of 25 man guilds having 10 great people 10 average people and 10 morons in their lineup and the 10 great people telling the rest to GTFO. Not every guild has 25 people who are great super best-friends who they always see the best in. My guild is the best on our server for a while and all of our players are good all the time. Still I do worry about a 10 man clique forming when cata rolls around (and I already see this because we don't run 10 mans as official guild activities) where you get 10 people who might be made up of older members, officers, and their buddies and whatever making a perfect group to steamroll the 10 man version of the instance and then the second group is left to try and scrape together enough people to make a balanced group from the leavings. Obviously the problem is exacerbated by the fact that half the guild doesn't even care about progressing in 10 mans so just don't want to go, but even so it's worrying.

I can imagine a call of "ok guys you're all sucking tonight, let's call it for now, we'll work out a 10 man lineup so we can progress" all too easily if we actually encounter y'know hard content. I have been called a cynic though.

I like my guild and I like and respect everyone in it a lot. We're all good players, but yeah ordinary human bias: you see the best in the people that you like more and the worst in people when they're ticking you off, especially during stressful times like wiping on progression content. The mere existence of the option to just say "ok guys fuck off, we're gonna get out 10 'best' people out and get us some progress" is very dangerous simply because it gives an alternative to going back and wiping a few more times to get that encounter down on 25 man.

Scenario: you're wiping for months on M'uru. Would you have kept manning up and Jack Bauer-ing through it on 25 man, or would you have said "fuck it" and flipped it to 10 man and gone at it with the 10 people who you like most and so perceive to be the better players?

[Kalbear]

I think the cap is good...kinda.

The problem is that of heroics vs raids. Let's assume that the max cap is what was proposed above - 25man bosses in a week, basically. If you do do 25 man raids, why would you ever set foot in a heroic? Maybe early on when you can't progress or something, but that's about it. Which means LFD is going to be very, very barren after a few weeks and after people are working on the hard modes.

Unless, of course, that people don't care about 25 mans any more, in which case 10 mans are going to have to do the daily heroic to supplement their income. Which I guess is fine.

I would have rather they had put a cap on the # of badges you could get from daily heroics per week so that you don't feel compelled to run it every single day.

[RaceBannon42]

I like the cap.

They say they will be gating progression, so How I see things is for each new teir LFG will be pretty full of raiders looking to fill out their badge cap for the week.

But by capping it at say 25 badges thei can sell the tier pices for 25 badges rather than 50 becasue people wont be able to farm up 60 a week.

[PhelanArcetus]

I would say that the cap will probably be on par with doing full 25-man clears of the current content. Now it'll be quite a while on most servers before many people can do that. Add in their alts who don't have a 25-man slot... there'll be people in LFD. Hopefully those people won't just be the morons and undergeared.

Hell, without the explicit cap (just the implicit do 1 random/day, 2x vault, 1x weekly, 2x ICC a week), at least half the people I get in LFD are badly geared and blatantly incompetent. I don't think that'll change very much. Towards the end of a tier perhaps, but definitely not early when the bosses are gated and people have a ton of upgrades to hunt for. I slow down when I'm nearing the end of my upgrade list; it feels less urgent to me.

There definitely are guilds out there who have 25 solid players who enjoy being together. And people who like the larger social dynamic. My guild isn't one of them (we don't even have 25 individual players), and I'm not one of the latter. Nine people is plenty for me. I've disliked 25-mans for the greater number of mouthbreathers to carry and to screw it up. I've disliked them for the far greater delays and organizational issues. ("Wait, who's doing Kings on warriors again?") And I've disliked them because I frankly just don't see myself finding 24 people I enjoy spending time with. So I'd be sticking to 10s without this change.

Will it kill 25s? For some people, definitely. I know a lot of people who are in the "solid 10-man team, lousy 25-man team", and they won't have much incentive to work with the extra 15 if it's going to preclude getting further in the 10s. (Example: my guild and the main one we partner with for 25s are both working on Sindy, I believe, in our 10s. In the 25, which I don't attend and some people swap characters for, but still, the pairing is still on Rotface & Festergut.) But there are people who won't want to break up their larger team, so it won't kill raiding in general.

[Angeleyes]

Everyone keep in mind, it is points!!1!

So there is way more fractional ability to make stuff gel in a point system. Currently it is 2 emblems per boss, 2 emblems for your daily dungeon.

I imagine a world where it is 2,000 points per ICC boss. 1,250 points per Daily Heroic. 1,750 for your VoA boss.

They could even do stuff like 1st wing bosses = 1,500 points. Blood, Frost, Unholy = 2,250 Points. Lich King = 3,000 points.

There is a lot more ability to tweak numbers with points then badges. Alternatively, with 2 different progression raids, you can mix points there too. Adding decisions as to whether you want to go to raid A and get quick points, or raid B for higher iLvl loot.

The thing I really like about Bliz, is while some of the Blue posts can be knee jerk, all of he changes to stuff like this are well thought out solutions to problems. Any QQing that the average internet peon can come up with Blizzard has probably already thought through and has decided to still implement anyway for specific reasons. I love the care they take with the game. They don't always get it right, but they tend to be well intentioned if nothing else.

[Kalbear]

The thing I really like about Bliz, is while some of the Blue posts can be knee jerk, all of he changes to stuff like this are well thought out solutions to problems.

I don't think this is at all accurate. :)

A lot of WotLK was knee jerking to issues that they were told about but ignored or decided to wait on. Tank balance, DPS balance, buffs and debuffs, the heroic daily reward system, the hard mode/normal mode split (which was done differently on every single tier of content), itemization, itemization drops, the tier system, the badge system, wintergrasp, arenas - all of these were drastically altered from BC to WotLK, and altered again with every single tier.

That is not 'well thought out'. That's 'we're going to try this and see if it works, and if it doesn't we'll do something else'. Which honestly is fine; they tended to make smaller changes more often than big overhauls. But let's not pretend that this had some grand design. After all, they had to introduce a debuff to tanks because they didn't anticipate how fast item levels would grow. How do you not anticipate that? It's not like the players introduced a bunch of gear.

[Shryke]

I don't think this is at all accurate. :)

A lot of WotLK was knee jerking to issues that they were told about but ignored or decided to wait on. Tank balance, DPS balance, buffs and debuffs, the heroic daily reward system, the hard mode/normal mode split (which was done differently on every single tier of content), itemization, itemization drops, the tier system, the badge system, wintergrasp, arenas - all of these were drastically altered from BC to WotLK, and altered again with every single tier.

That is not 'well thought out'. That's 'we're going to try this and see if it works, and if it doesn't we'll do something else'. Which honestly is fine; they tended to make smaller changes more often than big overhauls. But let's not pretend that this had some grand design. After all, they had to introduce a debuff to tanks because they didn't anticipate how fast item levels would grow. How do you not anticipate that? It's not like the players introduced a bunch of gear.

How do yo not anticipate that?

Because you don't anticipate Hard modes, which weren't planned for back when WOTLK was being developed.

Hard modes completely fucked up the gear curve for this expansion. They've said it numerous times. This isn't complicated.

[Kalbear]

Yes, but that's my point. They didn't plan on doing hard modes, and certainly didn't plan on them fucking up everything. Angel said that all blizzard's solutions are well thought out answers to problems. Well, it's clear that wasnt' all that well thought out. It was brought up many times by folks, and it was basically dismissed.

Again, that's fine. It's clear that Blizzard is experimenting on what works best and what doesn't, and they're not needlessly wedded to any given system. But it's also clear that their solutions aren't always thought through with some of the more obvious consequences. Seeing that avoidance and huge tank damage was a problem was seen as early as Sarth. Seeing that gear inflation was getting kinda stupid with hard mode gear was being seen as early as Ulduar and even KT. Seeing the ramifications of both was done by almost every theorycrafter I read.

And they didn't have to do hard modes releasing ridiculous amounts or ridiculous ilvls of gear, either. There was nothing that required them to have level jumps of 20 levels between content (245 vs 226 for normal ToC vs normal Uld). They introduced ivl 272 items when the previous high was 239! They could have very easily made the jump in ilvl be half a tier (6 points) and kept ToC 10 at the same level as uld25, making the transition 226(toc10), 239 (toc25/togc10), 245 (togc 25). They chose not to.

[Shryke]

Yes, but that's my point. They didn't plan on doing hard modes, and certainly didn't plan on them fucking up everything. Angel said that all blizzard's solutions are well thought out answers to problems. Well, it's clear that wasnt' all that well thought out. It was brought up many times by folks, and it was basically dismissed.

Again, that's fine. It's clear that Blizzard is experimenting on what works best and what doesn't, and they're not needlessly wedded to any given system. But it's also clear that their solutions aren't always thought through with some of the more obvious consequences. Seeing that avoidance and huge tank damage was a problem was seen as early as Sarth. Seeing that gear inflation was getting kinda stupid with hard mode gear was being seen as early as Ulduar and even KT. Seeing the ramifications of both was done by almost every theorycrafter I read.

And they didn't have to do hard modes releasing ridiculous amounts or ridiculous ilvls of gear, either. There was nothing that required them to have level jumps of 20 levels between content (245 vs 226 for normal ToC vs normal Uld). They introduced ivl 272 items when the previous high was 239! They could have very easily made the jump in ilvl be half a tier (6 points) and kept ToC 10 at the same level as uld25, making the transition 226(toc10), 239 (toc25/togc10), 245 (togc 25). They chose not to.

Except your point doesn't make any sense. Their solutions WERE well thought out. Then they changed what they were gonna do.

You seem to expect them to anticipate stuff they hadn't planned on doing in the first place.

They changed their plans and added Hard Modes. This means more gear levels and more gear inflation and there's no way to stop that. There's no way to plan your way out of that.