Officers' Quarters: The great raid size debate, part 2

Last week, I received an email asking me for my thoughts on raid size in Cataclysm. As it turns out, I have quite a few thoughts -- three columns' worth, in fact, covering four different categories: gameplay, logistics, rewards and intangibles. My goal is to help officers and their guild members to choose which raid size is best suited for their guild. A week ago, I wrote about the gameplay category.
This week's column will cover two topics that have been linked together throughout the history of the game. From the very beginning of WoW, Blizzard has made a connection between more difficult logistics and greater rewards. Molten Core, Onyxia, and later 40-man raids rewarded the best available gear in their respective heydays. Throughout The Burning Crusade and Wrath, 25-man content yielded the best items. For Cataclysm, this paradigm is shifting.
Let's take a look at the logistics involved with the two raid sizes and the rewards that each size offers.
Logistics
- A 25-man raid requires an intense recruiting effort. A large and diverse roster is essential to field a 25-man consistently from week to week. There will almost always be a player or two who is unable to attend any given raid. Also, there's almost always a spec or a role that you need more of in order to ensure a well-balanced raid, so rarely do you get to relax your recruiting efforts. For a 10-man guild, on the other hand, you can get away with carrying just a few extra raiders. Once you reach a certain point at which you have enough dependable players, you can stop recruiting. If you're starting a guild from scratch, you're probably going to have to settle for 10-mans at first before you can build up to 25-man raids. Finding so many solid raiders is never an easy task.
- "Cat herding" is flat-out easier in 10-man raids. There can be little debate on this issue. Getting 10 people to show up on time and follow instructions is easier to do when you have fewer people to worry about.
- More raiders means more attendance and technical issues. In a 10-man, you have 15 fewer people who unexpectedly have to take a sick dog to the vet or entertain family from out of town. You have 15 fewer people who might have trouble logging in, experience weird addon problems, or DC during a boss fight. Such issues can lead to canceled raids, long mid-raid delays, or frustrating wipes. And the more raiders you're counting on, the more likely it is that some of them are going to disappoint you, hold you up, or make your night miserable.
- Subbing is easier in a larger raid. To counterbalance the previous point, it is generally easier to substitute players when you're working with a larger raid size. There are a few reasons for this. For one thing, if your raiders are using dual specs, then there's almost always someone who can switch roles to replace the person subbing out, if necessary. Another reason is that a larger raid depends less on each individual's performance. If you're swapping a player who does 8,000 DPS for one who does 6,000, that's easier to manage when the DPSer is one of 17 as opposed to one of six. Finally, larger raids are more likely to have multiple people who know how to perform specialized actions, such as using the Magnetic Core against Mimiron in phase 3 or "driving" the abomination against Professor Putricide.
- Scheduling difficulties are easier to manage with more players. The common thinking here would suggest the opposite, but I find that scheduling for fewer people actually creates more problems. The problem with the smaller raid size, especially if you have a tight-knit team, is that each person is so crucial. And because those players know that they're crucial, each one expects you to schedule around their own conflicts. Finding open nights for 25 players can sometimes be more difficult, but with a larger pool of players, it is easier to say, "This is the best night for the most people, so we all have to adjust" -- and get away with it. You're also less likely to cancel a raid due to one or two players' being unable to attend, because it's expected. In a 10, if two of your three tanks are /afk for the night, your raid is toast.
- Loot is easier to distribute in 10-man. Again, it's hard to argue against this. There are fewer items to give away and fewer people interested in each one. Even if you use a complex system such as EPGP, you still have fewer players to track within that system.
Rewards
- 25-man bosses are worth more valor points. According to Blizzard, 25-man bosses will be worth 105 valor points, compared to 75 in 10-man. Due to the weekly point cap, however, players who raid either size can still earn the same amount of points per week. Those who raid 10-man will be required to run a few extra daily heroics to reach the cap. For players who don't have much time to play outside of raids, larger groups will allow them to gear up faster.
- Normal 10s offer the same amount of items per player. In the April raiding announcement posted by Nethaera, she wrote, "25-player versions will drop a higher quantity of loot per player (items, but also badges, and even gold)." However, this is not currently the case in beta. Bosses in 10-man drop two items, or one item for every five players. Bosses in 25-man raids drop five items, or one item for every five players. The ratio is currently the same. However ...
- Heroic 25s will drop more items per player than Heroic 10s. I don't think this fact is widely known, but Ghostcrawler said exactly this back in June, and I haven't heard anything to contradict it since. If your guild plans to tackle heroic bosses, then there will be more loot to go around per player if you're raiding at the larger size. We don't know the exact numbers yet, but with heroic raid testing happening in the beta, we should find out soon.
- Fewer items will be sharded in 25s. Although the same ratio of items will drop in either size at normal difficulty, larger raids will be able to put more of those items to use. In 10s, you simply can't have every spec represented there, even if you count dual specs. In most cases, you probably won't even have every class represented. Larger raids will usually be able to field at least one player from each class. If you count dual specs, such a raid will generally have someone who can make good use of every item, at least for the few first months until the instance is farmed out. This issue is somewhat alleviated by the elimination of spec-specific stats like armor penetration and defense, but given the new armor specialization bonuses, I'd say the sharding issue will be worse, not better, in the expansion.
- Legendary items should be available for both sizes. In the same thread I linked above, Ghostcrawler confirmed that legendaries will be available in both 10s and 25s, unlike today. This intention was reiterated at the open Q&A at BlizzCon 2010.
- Achievements are equivalent. No distinction exists for either raid size as far as achievements are concerned, so players will earn the same achievements and achievement rewards, such as drakes, regardless of their preferred raid size. On a side note, remember that raid groups must consist of at least 80 percent guild members to earn guild achievements. That's easier to pull off in 10s if your guild has a smaller roster.
That's it for this week! Next week, I'll cover the intangibles category for the two raid sizes, as well as draw some overall conclusions to help you make this extremely important decision for your guild.
/salute
Filed under: Officers' Quarters (Guild Leadership)
Patch 5.3 interview with Ghostcrawler
Mystery of the Unborn Val'kyr
The latest patch 5.3 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 3 of 3)
Homeschool Nov 8th 2010 3:07PM
Blast, that was supposed to be a reply. Guess it's getting posted twice...
Saraduahn Nov 8th 2010 3:13PM
Ghostcrawler specifically stated at Blizzcon during the Q&A panel that 25-mans will not offer more items per player than 10-mans after all. A player observed in the sample raids on site that 10-mans were dropping 2 pieces of loot, and 25-mans were dropping 5 pieces of loot (which is the same ratio of loot per player) - and GC confirmed that that is intentional. 25-mans will only offer more points per player, NOT more items per player.
In point of fact, GC also said at Blizzcon that it will be more Justice points per player, but presumably he meant Valor points.
Lemons Nov 8th 2010 3:23PM
I don't know about anyone else, but I want to continue doing 25 mans in cataclysm. There's something epic about that raid size. 10 mans make me depressed mostly because this statement:
"those players know that they're crucial, each one expects you to schedule around their own conflicts."
is so brutally true. That's the exact reason the tanks log on late all the time meanwhile the dps come online 45 minutes beforehand just to ensure a spot. The tanks know they're important, and they're even more important in 10 mans.
In 25 if a tank fails to show up on time we don't have to sit around twiddling our thumbs. In that case someone just switches to an off spec and tanks instead. It's not as good as a main set tank, but at least we're rolling. In a 10 man it's not always as easy to find someone who's off-specced for tanking so you end up spending an hour waiting for your tank to log on, if he does at all.
Not judging tanks or anything here, but that's just the reality of the situation. You're putting a lot more trust in those 10 players, and even if they're great people it's easy for rl to get in the way and totally screw up a raid night. That's why I like 25 mans because things are more fluid and they're more adaptable to scheduling conflicts, people dropping mid-raid, people not showing up, etc.
Rob Nov 8th 2010 4:48PM
Right, I agree. And how often have you heard this. "We can't raid X today because person Y with crucial class Z isn't here". Or "We can't PUG this progression content". Or anything similar. Whereas with 25s, you really only need 20ish people, you can carry 5, and you have excess tanks most likely. The major limitation is healers, but nowadays the alure of nice loot is usually enough to fill these raids quickly. In cata though? I think 25 man PUGs will be dead.
Grak Nov 9th 2010 7:45AM
@ Lemons
No offense, but the problem you're describing there is nothing to do with the raid size, and everything to do with the type of person you raid with. If your team are the sort to waste other peoples time because they know they are irreplaceable... then there are bigger problems there. Either recruit people that are going to be adults about being in a team, and/or get other raiders offspecs geared up for more comp flexibility.
Revynn Nov 8th 2010 3:30PM
- "More raiders means more attendance and technical issues. In a 10-man, you have 15 fewer people who unexpectedly have to take a sick dog to the vet or entertain family from out of town. You have 15 fewer people who might have trouble logging in, experience weird addon problems, or DC during a boss fight. Such issues can lead to canceled raids, long mid-raid delays, or frustrating wipes. And the more raiders you're counting on, the more likely it is that some of them are going to disappoint you, hold you up, or make your night miserable."
There's two sides to this coin, to be fair. While 25's have a greater chance of people not showing up or having techinical issues, having one person bail out of a 25 because his computer is PMSing is far less detrimental to the health of the raid (unless said person is a tank) than it would be in a 10.
jamesdanek Nov 8th 2010 3:51PM
You forgot the most important aspect. 25 mans are way more fun!
Rufio Nov 8th 2010 5:10PM
Weeeeeeeee!!
Skarn Nov 8th 2010 5:25PM
That'll come in the "Intangibles" section next week. Then again, fun is subjective. In my raiding experience, I've had more fun in 10-mans. I enjoyed 25s (mostly) but the 10s were just plain more fun.
N-train Nov 8th 2010 5:36PM
Maybe I haven't run enough (or the "right") 25 mans, but I personally find that I feel much more like a team member in a 10 than I do a 25, and therefore have more fun.
Especially as a dps, in a 25 man I feel like I'm in a battleground group, where if I happen to do something to contribute to the group good for me, but my primary goal is to stay alive in the mass of people and spell effects and numbers flying about. In 10 mans, I feel like an important aspect to the group, where my input actually matters and where if I blow a rotation/stand in fire/pop a cooldown/do something notable, the consequences are noticeable (for good or bad) and can possibly change the outcome.
In 25s, the group seems centered on the tanks, maybe a main healer or two, the top 3-4 dps, and the raid leader, and everyone else seems like extra baggage and cannon fodder, and (on most fights) an error or death for a good 60-70% of the raid doesn't mean much, if anything at all. I find if I'm not in that "important" handful of people I'm just not having that much fun.
Not to rag on anyone else, that's just my humble opinion.
raven Nov 8th 2010 5:57PM
For me, 25-mans are thoroughly un-enjoyable because of the crushing graphics lag and network latency. As soon as any 25-man fight starts, my game becomes a ridiculously lurid series of image still-caps as my nVidia Geforce 9800 GTX struggles to draw spell effects and particles from the 1 million things flying around the screen. Moving and navigating away from fires and oozes become a game of "predict where you'll go 3 seconds from now", and simply casting a spell requires me furiously wapping my fingers on the keyboard several times for each cast. My 5-man and 10-man raids, on the other hand, are generally smooth and have absolutely no lag what so ever.
Granted I don't have the latest cutting system, but my PC is about a year old (4GB Mem, 2TB disk, High-speed cable modem, etc), and WoW in general doesn't require me to buy a >$2K computer to run 5-man and 10-man content. In the end it's just not an enjoyable experience at all, and it's part of why I stopped raiding.
Jayjay Nov 8th 2010 6:01PM
I also prefer 25 mans to 10 mans although my guild runs both (working LK H in both groups), atm we have to field an alt group for the several 10 mans that we do when we arent doing 25 mans. 25 mans actually feel like a raid instead of a 'slightly bigger regular instance run' and are in general, in my opinion, jsut more FUN. Also, and Ive found this in a few guilds, 10 mans always seem to attract the people whose egos need the most feeding and are therefore the most irritating. It became such an issue (with different people) that I stopped running 10 mans during BC (and again in Wrath although I started again) for a while because the ego fest ('I'm right!' 'no, I'm right' and 'me me me its all about me') got too much to deal with; the game is suppose to be FUN not an excercise in dealing with people Id cross the road to avoid in real life.
In a 25 man those people are still present but they seem far less vocal - perhaps having 24 people p'd at them instead of 8 or 9 was just more prohibitive. Maybe there's less 'payoff' having a drama fest in a bigger group where youre not the focus of attention; hard to know for sure.
I also agree about the people who suddenly decide to take the night off on a 25 man seem easier to do without, or you can make a couple of 10 man raids out of your raiders if needed; can't do that with a 10 man, especially if the aforementioned ego-monkey decides to grandstand to 'show how important they are' in an effort to get their own way.
Scism Nov 8th 2010 6:43PM
Great article. Have you considered the possibility of 2 10 man teams? Thats what we are planning for cata - a "progression" team of our best raiders (ie officers) and we'll pull in people from the second team where necessary. With about 25 committed raiders this means our progression team should always be going at the very least (we've had a history of attendence issues in the past) and we should be able to get another team out most weeks barring lots of absentees.
I've always preferred the intimacy of 10 man raids - when you've run with the same team for 3 months you know everyone inside out and can start to really second guess what they are doing most of the time. and the sense of achievment between you when you do "get the prize" is even sweeter. I often found with 25 mans there would be much more issues (sulking, being an ass, loot issues, poor performance/slacking etc) which made it less fun
Maxiless Nov 8th 2010 7:19PM
I HOST A 10 MAN PROGRESSION FOCUSED GUILD WITH 25 MAN RUNS FOR FUN, WE DECIED TO ONLY DO 2 OF THE NEW RAIDS AS PROGRESS AND ON AS 25 MAN FUN RUN TO SUIT OUR CASUAL RAIDERS, ONCE 25 MAN IS ON FARM WE CAN SWITCH THE RAIDS AROUND THIS KEEPS EVERYONE HAPPY.
Skrotus Nov 8th 2010 10:31PM
I can see these debates lasting maybe 6 months before most raiding guilds drop 25 mans entirely. A larger raid has some cool-factor associated with it, and more points and (maybe) more loot from 25 heroic are quite nice, but are they worth the extra effort?
Getting 25 people together reliably is hard, getting 25 *good* people together reliably is even harder. Progression is easier in 10 mans for this simple fact.
The only real issue is that we're coming in to this new system with mostly 25+ raiding teams, so converting to 10 mans straight away is messy and likely to leave a few people upset at missing out.
gosubilko Nov 8th 2010 11:41PM
I'm surprised nobody mentions converting the raid from 10 to 25 and vice versa. If I have a 25-man guild that can raid fairly regularly, we can still continue to progress even if half of the raid will be absent the next day. This will make our 25s stronger next week for the next boss on the kill list. This will only work though if Blizzard makes gearing in 25s faster/easier and thus make it more attractive to players.
nuttyraptor Nov 9th 2010 10:59AM
How about 15 man that would be a compromise between 25 and 10 man
Sloegin Nov 9th 2010 5:01PM
From what I hear from guildmates on the beta, the tuning between the 10s and 25s is fairly borked; 10s are relatively faceroll and 25s are nigh impossible.
I'm sure it's a big challenge for Blizzard, hopefully we don't see situations like a 25 getting thru a couple bosses, then the raid breaking down into a couple of 10-mans to get the next boss they can't down in the 25, leaving 5 of the raiders in the lurch.
Trisnic Nov 9th 2010 6:15PM
I prefer 25s myself, I raided during the 40 man days and feel that larger raids are far more "epic". Personally if 40s were still around I would be running those. To me accomplishments in 10 mans just aren't as exciting without 25 people to share in the kill.
I also run a fairly large guild. We can still field 2 25 mans (one being an alt/friend raid) without any issues. Our main raid has around 35 people being invited a week of which usually 30 accept. When someone makes huge mistakes, can't perform or harm raid synergy they are cut from the main raid. The thought of cutting a ton of people from my roster is not a pleasant one and running 4-5 guild 10 man raids every week seems like a nightmare.
My guild started smaller like most and we used to run 10 mans. I found that raids were hurt far more by no-showing during the 10 man days. We didn't have 3 extra people with a tank off-spec or 4 people with a healer off-spec. To get the reliability we have now we would need to have a rolling roster of around 16 for a 10 man. We have attendance policies but who knows when several people will be unable to show up. With our 25s, we have not cancelled a 25 man raid in 6 months and we do not need to pug anyone.
With that being said we are staying a 25 man guild but will adapt if absolutely necessary. We do have a group of 14 friends in the guild that will be running their own 10s which could help with our guild progression if 10s are so much easier. I am really hoping that 25 mans are viable because I enjoy them and I would rather not have to further limit the number of members in our guild.
Knowing how RNG is I also do see 25 mans as the more viable option for correctly gearing our raid group.