Skip to Content
3-31-2009 @ 9:20PM
Hear hear.Our guild typically runs 2 10-man Naxx groups per weekend but can't field a 25. Having maxxed out my ilevel 200 gear options on two characters, I'm now having to pug Naxx 25 twice a week in order to get any upgrades.Now GC says (essentially) that Ulduar 25 will not be puggable, removing even that option.I would *much* rather 10 and 25 gave equal loot. Some 10-man fights are easier, some harder, on balance they're about the same. Bigger != better.
4-01-2009 @ 1:03AM
If you've maxed out the gear you can get from 10-man Naxx, then you're right where you're supposed to be for 10-man Ulduar. If you can't field the people for 25-man raids, then you don't need 25-man raid loot to keep going in your guild's progression. It seems like a lot of people are missing the whole separate progression. Now personally, I couldn't really care less what the ilvls are like between the two, but if they tune things properly (which they admit they haven't done, and have claimed they will fix for Ulduar) then why all the worry about being able to pug Ulduar? You have a guild that raids in 10-mans, you have all the 10-man gear from this tier, that means you're ready to step into the next 10-man raid.If you PvP, then it may matter. If they don't have appropriate arena rewards, you may have to run Uld-25.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.