Officers' Quarters: The great raid size debate

Cataclysm, as you are probably already aware, brings with it massive changes to the raiding scene in World of Warcraft. Certainly the most controversial change is Blizzard's desire, announced in April, to balance and separate 10- and 25-man raids -- namely, both sizes will share the same lockout and loot tables. The 10-man scene, widely regarded as inferior throughout WoW's history, will be designed to have approximately the same difficulty as its 25-man counterpart. Reports from the beta dungeon forums indicate that 10-man bosses are currently much easier to bring down than their 25-man versions, but we can only assume that Blizzard will take steps to even out the difficulty according to its stated goal.
In the weeks following the expansion's launch, it will be extremely interesting to see how this whole situation shakes out. These changes will force most guilds to choose one size or the other as their primary raiding focus. As I've previously stated, this is a good thing. Many officers right now, including the one who wrote this week's email, are wondering which size to choose. Officers' Quarters is here to help!
Hail Scott,
What is your take on 10-man versus 25-man raiding in Cataclysm? Our guild would like to continue raiding 25-mans, but several of the other raid guilds on our server have apparently decided to switch to 10s. Are they jumping to conclusions, or are they on to something? Is this the end of 25-man raiding, and are we in for a repeat of the guild implosions and massive raider unemployment we saw when 40s were dropped to 25s?
The falloutLots of uncertainty out there on this subject, your views on the matter in a future article would be very enlightening.
Regards,
Dunnik
Dunnik, I predict that we will see fallout similar to the vanilla-to-Burning Crusade raid-size transition for some guilds, but it won't be the same widespread disaster. Back then, raiding guilds didn't have a choice; everyone had to adapt to the change if they wanted to move forward. Some guilds were able to survive this transition, and some weren't.
Cataclysm will be a bit different. Many guilds will be able to keep their raiding focus the same, drawing on the same rosters. Larger guilds can maintain their larger rosters and continue to raid 25-mans; they just won't be able to run smaller raids with the same characters for additional loot and points. Other guilds can continue to run 10s with the same people; they just won't be able to pug 25-mans with the same characters. In short, the Cataclysm changes aren't nearly as big an adjustment as forcibly cutting your roster down to fit 40 players into 25 slots.
A number of guilds, unfortunately, will not fare so well. Some will dump players and reduce their roster to run 10s, as some have already done on Dunnik's server. Others will fracture into multiple 10-man guilds. The drama will hit hardest those guilds whose officers have no real plan, who haven't taken the time to decide what will be best for their guilds and make decisions accordingly.
Dunnik, whether or not you should switch to 10s is a question only you can answer -- but I can help you decide. This three-part column is about taking the first step and choosing the raid size that's best suited for your guild. That way, you can actually plan for the expansion rather than sit around and wait for the drama to happen.
Our first step is to examine the various factors involved. I've divided these factors into four categories: gameplay, rewards, logistics and intangibles. This week, I'll cover the advantages and disadvantages of gameplay for the different sizes.
Gameplay
- We can only speculate about relative difficulty. Wrath was the first expansion to offer the same bosses for different raid sizes. While most encounters, such as the Lich King, are easier with fewer people, they were also designed to be. They were designed to be killable using only lesser, 10-man loot and without access to every class's buffs. Even so, some encounters wound up harder to do in 10s. Sartharion with three drakes was an early -- and infamous -- example. Sindragosa, in my experience, is also much easier in a larger raid. Now that Blizzard is actually trying to make the difficulties equal, we just don't know how often it'll be able to nail it. I would expect a number of bosses to be easier for one raid size or another, but how many and how much easier is impossible to say at this point. Most players are assuming that 10s will be easier overall, but we have no compelling evidence of that yet. Beta is beta.
- 10-man raids offer fewer options for dealing with specific boss abilities and/or adds. For example, a boss that requires a ton of interrupts, such as General Vezax, is easier to deal with when you have more players who can interrupt. A boss with lots of adds to kite, such as Saurfang, is easier when you have more hunters, mages, death knights, etc. (Of course, there are generally fewer adds in a smaller raid size, but you still need someone to kite them.)
- Position-based abilities are easier to deal with in 10s. Spreading out in a room built for 25 players is obviously going to be a lot easier with only 10 players. Heroic Deathwhisper's phase 2 is a great example of this issue. Likewise, it's easier for a raid leader to see a player who's out of position when there are fewer people.
- Player deaths are not as crippling in 25-mans. A dead player in a 25 will not usually guarantee a wipe, whereas a dead player in a 10 is much harder to overcome. Consequently, 10-man raiders experience a greater fear of getting killed. To make matters worse, 25-man raids also have more ways to bring people back. Tanks are the exception -- a dead tank is a major problem no matter how many players you have. Blizzard seems to be experimenting with different cooldowns for a druid's battle rez. In-combat player recovery could become much more difficult in Cataclysm than it was for most of Wrath.
- It's easier to cover for someone else's mistake with 25 players. In a 10-man raid in which you might have two healers, for example, one healer's mistake can quickly lead to a player death or a wipe. Even if the other healer wants to help out, he or she generally can't afford to without losing someone else. In a larger raid, other healers can often cover for that player, healing his or her assigned target(s) for a short time. Likewise, if a DPS attacks the wrong target in a 10-man, that's about 14-18 percent less damage on the target, depending on that player's output. In a 25-man, it's only about 5-7 percent of total damage on average. Other DPS or even crit RNG could easily make up that difference.
/salute
Filed under: Officers' Quarters (Guild Leadership)






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Junionn Nov 1st 2010 3:09PM
I'm sure the backlash will be endless on this point..
However, On a consistent basis I can only complete the first 4 bosses of any raid. 2 1/2-3hours is usually the only time I have to raid during the week. Answers like "extend the lockout" or "join a guild doing the next phase". I know this is only really an issue in ICC as its an unusually large instance but it's frustrating nonetheless. I've seen Saurfang 6 times yet never seen the Blood Prince Council.
Galestrom Nov 1st 2010 3:23PM
I think the concern is valid. I seem to remember that they're hoping to make raids one-night gigs. Four to five bosses, all capable of being brought down in a night. I think this will work better than the current multiple-winged encounters that all but the most dedicated guilds can hope to complete in a given week.
Honestly, the free time I'm going to have is rejoicing at the concept already. ;)
Josin Nov 1st 2010 3:29PM
With a 30% buff in place, it really shouldn't be taking you 3 hours to get to Saurfang. My guild cleared to Arthas inside of 3 hours, and we're hardly one of the hardcore, super-progression guilds. (We'd like to be, but we'll see how things go in Cataclysm.)
Goradan Nov 1st 2010 3:34PM
I really don't mean this to come across in a condescending manner, but I think it might be your raid group.
With decent T10 gear, you can clear at least 3 wings in 2.5 hours, and if everyone knows what to expect, you can do everything but LK in 2. Even LK isnt' that hard these days. I'd venture to say it's not you, it's your group.
Good luck.
Imnick Nov 1st 2010 3:35PM
My guild can do 11/12 hc in two hours with the 30% buff and our new talents, so if you can't get past saurfang in three you really need to find better people to go with.
cptgrudge Nov 1st 2010 3:57PM
Echoing the other folks...not to sound like a jerk, but...
On my server, we've got a Sunday afternoon run of ICC25 that's usually 80% Guild Alliance/Friends and 20% PuGs. 3.5 hours, and we'll hit LK (Sindra if we're screwing around), with a smattering of HMs. Is this a run within your guild, or a random PuG you're joining? We always joke that after Saurfang is where "the instance is turned on" so it might be the group of people you're running with.
veil Nov 1st 2010 4:37PM
c'mon...it's not entirely fair to downrank josin. he's not saying anything intentionally condescending. three hours IS a pretty long time on the first wing.
Kuro Nov 1st 2010 4:37PM
If it bothers you that your group of folks who you run with are slow and low progressed, find a new group.
Saurfang only 6 times at this point, 50 weeks or so into the content.... perhaps your server is light on progression. I play on two. I lead an alt pug the other night that got past Purticide on my low progression server. For some (~5-6) in the raid, it was the first time seeing the boss on 25 man. On my high-pop server in our semi-pug we can do a full clear with 7/12 HM + RS in 4 hours.
Perhaps you have problems with raid pace. People don't like spinning their thumbs around waiting on so-and-so. It's from Naxx content and some of the advice is out dated, but the majority is still valid:
http://www.stratfu.com/videos/pull-guide-faster-raids-video
pigeon Nov 1st 2010 8:11PM
Yes it's easy to clear most of/all of icc in one night with people who *know* the fights and have *25 man* gear - but obviously Junionn doesn't, since he hasn't seen beyond one wing.
I think shorter raids but more of them would be a good idea, especially for people who pugs.
if you only have a few hours - then atm all you are going to see is 6/12 MAX. Think how long it takes a pug to fill, it can take almost an hour for a 25 man to start. Then add how much less smoothly then run in general. No way can the average pug clear ICC in one go.
micahks Nov 2nd 2010 8:47AM
I see the points of both sides, however, shortening the raid does not benefit the casual raider that enjoys a slow pace. After all, he is still only clearing 4-5 bosses. The raiders that prefer a faster pace are the only ones affected, and this is a negative effect. I am not a hardcore raider, but I enjoy runs that chain pull, distribute loot while the next trash is being cleared, and get things done quickly. It makes the game more enjoyable for me. I have ran into others that preferred the in-depth explanation for all fights, random afks, can't pull unless everyone is there, and 6 ready checks before the pull style of raiding. It is fine, but it is just not for me. The only advantage that someone who prefers this style will see from shorter raids is being able to say that they "cleared" a place. However, those that enjoy a faster style will likely clear all raid content in one night. I am sure everyone remembers ToC where you would have your 10man night clear normal, then heroic, and then put in an hour and a half in ulduar just to round out the 3hour raid slot.
Gravity Nov 2nd 2010 10:06PM
Hi all,
myself and several other leadership writers have started a site just for MMO Leaders. You might find it helpful in your decision-making. I've also let Scott know about it, hoping he might want to be active there too. In any case, we already have a number of qualified leaders writing.
http://mmoleader.com/
noobdeluxe Nov 1st 2010 3:12PM
I will be copy/pasting this onto our officer forum
zcubed Nov 1st 2010 4:24PM
A link to the article would probably help out wow insider a bit more.
jbodar Nov 1st 2010 5:25PM
Plagiarism FTL.
wackydavo Nov 1st 2010 5:34PM
Fair use FTW!
jbodar Nov 1st 2010 8:54PM
@wackydavo
Depends if he cites his source or not, don't it? Posting a link is just the right thing to do.
jbodar Nov 1st 2010 8:56PM
@wackydavo
To clarify, I don't think AOL is going to go after his guild forums or any silly crap like that.
Bogoradwee Nov 1st 2010 3:22PM
What about the fact that you have to actually find 25 people that won't screw up a mechanic and wipe the raid? You mentioned that it's easier to kite more things, interrupt more things, and stuff like that, but that's only assuming everyone is doing what they're supposed to. In 10 man, it's much easier to cut the fat and get the non-crappy people... This shouldn't be a problem for most guilds on most servers, but as a relatively small guild on a really small server that still hasn't seen anyone kill H25 LK, I'm sure you can imagine the problems in finding available quality raiders.
Pyromelter Nov 1st 2010 3:29PM
Great minds think alike, my thoughts mirror yours almost exactly.
"In 10 man, it's much easier to cut the fat and get the non-crappy people."
This statement alone is reason enough why 10mans >>>>> 25mans for cataclysm
Imnick Nov 1st 2010 3:33PM
It is only easier to "cut the fat" if you are starting with 25 people.
Once you downgrade to a 10 player guild and only have 10-12 raiders, you can't really afford to drop anyone.