The last gasp of 25-man raiding
by Anne Stickney 
Feb 24th 2012 at 3:00PM
Imagine you have been placed in front of two hedge mazes, both leading to the same wonderful prize at the end. It could be a car, money, a trip to an exotic location -- whatever you really want, for the purpose of this imaginary exercise, OK? So there are two mazes, each leading to the awesome prize, but as you look at those mazes, you realize one of them is twistier, longer, and has potentially more hazards in it. The other is difficult, to be sure -- but side by side, it's slightly less hazardous than the other. And they both lead to the exact same thing.
So which maze do you take?
Most people would much rather take that shorter, slightly less hazardous maze. I mean, if you've got two choices that get you to the same fabulous prize, you'd be out of your mind to take the difficult path, wouldn't you? Welcome to the debate of 10-man vs. 25-man raiding -- and the main reason why 25-man raids are slowly dying out.
So which maze do you take?
Most people would much rather take that shorter, slightly less hazardous maze. I mean, if you've got two choices that get you to the same fabulous prize, you'd be out of your mind to take the difficult path, wouldn't you? Welcome to the debate of 10-man vs. 25-man raiding -- and the main reason why 25-man raids are slowly dying out.
It's convenience. How much easier is it to get a group of nine other people together than a group of 24? Way, way easier -- and it's a lot easier to work around the schedules of 10 people than 25. Beru over at Falling Leaves and Wings took a look at the continued vitality of 25-man raiding, and the outlook is ... well, not the brightest in the world. Beru questions whether it's the content or the ease of raiding or some other aspect that is causing those 25-man guilds to crumble and whether 25-man raiding is likely to stick around as a result of all of this.
But let's go back to that analogy from the top, shall we? When I'm talking about the difficulty of the maze, I'm not comparing it to the difficulty of the encounters themselves. What I'm talking about is the difficulty of trying to accommodate 25 people's lives and still manage to pull together a successful raiding group. The problem with 10 vs. 25 has nothing to do with the difficulty of the encounters -- it's the fact that both of these raids offer the same loot and the same incentives, so in the long run, it's easier to get nine people together to get those rewards than try to get 24 people together to get the same exact thing.
As a matter of fact, I don't have a viable solution for this. And that's what is hitting me the hardest here, as a 25-man raider. I think the issue at hand is something so severe that I don't quite know how to fix it. People always want things that they don't or cannot have -- it's the whole grass is always greener philosophy. And for those that couldn't manage to schedule 25-man raiding in The Burning Crusade, they got 10-mans in Wrath. But for those who did 10-man raiding in Wrath, they still wanted what 25-man raids could offer, and they got it in Cataclysm.
And if you're going through the struggle of getting 25 people to work together, what you get out of that experience should be a greater reward than getting 10 people together, because it is far more difficult to pull together and work with 25 unique personalities than 10. There should be a reason for people to want to try and get that many people together and work with those varied personalities, something that makes it viable and makes it worth it.
What Blizzard has been trying to do is squash 10- and 25-man raiding into an equal experience and what it should be doing is embracing the difference between the two and enhancing the different experiences of both. Otherwise, all most 25-man guilds have to look forward to is the day upon which they will simply cease to be.
World of Warcraft: Mists of Pandaria is the next expansion, raising the level cap to 90, introducing a brand new talent system, and bringing forth the long-lost pandaren race to both Horde and Alliance. Check out the trailer and follow us for all the latest MoP news!
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Raiding
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
ScrubRogue Feb 24th 2012 3:15PM
Already seeing the end IMO, we used to have several 25 man raids...now a single 10.
Vgk Feb 24th 2012 6:40PM
25 man guilds are indeed becoming far and few between, I personally enjoy 25 man raiding and am part of the last 25 man guild in our server. We are 2/8 on heroic 25m DS, if we split into 2 or 3 10 man's we could probably already be 3 or 4/8 due to having less logistics and having to manage less people in a raid but we simply enjoy 25 man's over the 10 man versions of raids.
The only issue I have with 25 man raiding is the disproportion of tanks compared to 10 mans. 10 mans need 2 tanks yet 25 mans which have more than DOUBLE the amount of people only require 2 tanks as well.
Sinthar Feb 27th 2012 11:19AM
Whilst I agree 25 mans are on the way out bar some diehards, I disagree with the reasoning of the author.
The 'maze' analogy is particularly wrong. Its not about how complex it is, its the fact you have to ORGANISE 10 ppl or 25 ppl to do it simutaneously. Thats not the same thing AT ALL. The rewards are SLIGHTLY (and by that i mean so slight its negligable) better for 25 man, but that is NOT worth the extra hasstle and burnout the RL/organiser goes through. That said there are examples of 25 man being easier (ie one death does not mean autowipe etc), but again it is not worth the hassle of the organisational difficulties. So basically we are saying 10 man is easier to organise, so its quicker and more FUN in a GAME to do. See my point?
Keep 25 mans sure, some people prefer them, and fair play to them, I wish them all the luck in the world, but I prefer a quicker easier game (organisational wise at least) for FUN, rather than making it another logistic problem I have to solve before we can start killing anything.
Inzano Feb 24th 2012 3:19PM
"And if you're going through the struggle of getting 25 people to work together, what you get out of that experience should be a greater reward than getting 10 people together, because it is far more difficult to pull together and work with 25 unique personalities than 10."
From that line and from other inferences in your post, it seems to me your saying 25 man raids should get more because its harder to get 25 people online. I couldn't disagree more.
If there is going to be a significant differance in 10 and 25, blizzard needs to do a much better job of balancing them against each other, as well as against the content. Personally i think they should drop it to 10 and 20 man raids. Fight requires 2 tanks on 10 man, then it requires 4 on 20 man. They are not balanced against each other when 10 man needs 2 tanks 3 heals, and 25 man needs 2 tanks 5 heals. I wont even get into personal responsibility in them..... 1 dps dead 2 mins in on a 10 man is a wipe, on 25, you lose 2-4 and its still winnable.
Bottom line would be i agree with you, in that they need to do something, and im not sure what
Geiss Feb 24th 2012 3:25PM
Blizz devs have indicated that there are only so many unique mechanics they can run through involving so many tanks. Adds, multi-boss ("Conclave"), and tank swaps run out of originality pretty fast.
Me Feb 24th 2012 3:54PM
I just want to throw something in here on behalf of all 25-man heroic raiders.
1 Dead Raider means a wipe.
More often than not. Certainly two dead raiders is a wipe on *anything* that is truly progression content.
The idea that you can have 1-2 die off in 25s and till finish just fine is a myth. If anything, it's worse in 25s. If every person screws up just once every 25 attempts, you'll fail the really hard heroics. On the other hand, if every person screws up just once every 25 attempts in 10 man, then 60% of your attempts will be successful.
Also, anyone who did Yogg-Saron pre-nerf "I didn't stand in the gas cloud!" knows that it used to be even worse!
VSUReaper Feb 24th 2012 3:57PM
I disagree with Anne, 25 man raids do not need to embrace what is unique between the raids: the only thing that is different is the ratio of the roles, the quantity of loot, and the amount of people involved.
In fact, the biggest perk I see of being in a 25 man is that you can gear up faster, you can get legendaries faster, and if you have an off night, someone else is able to make up the difference.
In my 10 mans, if I'm not firing on all 10 cylinders, then a boss might not die. When I was in 25 mans, as long as I was in the top 10, no one said anything to me, even though it was obvious when I wasnt really concentrating.
The reasons I dont do 25 mans anymore is the people issue. Getting 28 people (subs), all with geared offspecs, most with alts that perform different rolls than their mains, all with personalities that jive together.... its a monumental task. In fact, the reason I left my last guild, which was a 25 man guild, was because there were 5 people that insisted on acting like asses, talking about stuff that made me feel uncomfortable, and when it was brought up with officers, I was told to relax.
I cant suggest any one thing that might fix it, but I think 25's already get everything extra that they should: its the community, or the lack thereof that is making 25s die and 10s flourish.
Angus Feb 24th 2012 4:08PM
Geiss: they've already run out of unique situations when using 2 tanks. So why not change it up? Ultra already kinda has this in 25 man with extra people soaking the debuff. Nef had to have a DPS grab adds unless you brought a 3rd tank.
My biggest problem with this whole thing is that some people seem to not get how hard it is for a guild to keep a 25 man roster. My guild has been unable to get close thanks to the 25 man guilds with their faster legendaries and faster hearing STEALING people from us. We get people geared up, start getting close to either 2 10 mans or being able to PUG the rest on a 25 and 2 or 3 leave because they get promised better loot.
Personally, I think 25 man raids should just go the way of 40 mans. It feels more personal and heroic having a small strike team than a huge mob.
I am pretty sure this is going I get me darkened fast by the 25 man elitists, but it's been how I feel for a while.
Gindy Feb 24th 2012 4:36PM
This 1 dead dps thing is NOT fault. Literally JUST a day ago I joined a group on a rogue that I had JUST leveled. They were only 1/8HM so they weren't exceptionally amazing or anything and we killed heroic 25man hagara with 2 dead dps and myself 3k dps below the lowest, barely above the tank. 25mans only harder pointer is the logistics of getting 25 people together. As for personal difficulty theres much more room for error, most 25s are fallling apart because a select few in the group always feel they were being forced to carry less skilled players so they form their own 10man.
Kelly Feb 24th 2012 4:45PM
@Me - My first foray into heroic raiding was against Halfus in T11. 5 SECONDS into the fight and I was tanking the floor (no explanation meant I attacked a drake, who proceeded to eat me).
Result? Easy kill.
IF Blizz didn't KNOW there was a difference in the number of deaths that a group could endure and still succeed, WHY ARE THERE THREE BREZZES in 25 man, versus only 1 in 10 man? Answer: It isn't because there are 15 more people (that would mean 2.5 brezzes, so, 2, not 3). It's because they KNOW that you have more breathing room in 25 man vs 10 man.
One guy pulling 10k? So? He's at 4.3% of the group's dps (made up numbers based on my memories of 25 man and the lfr), not a big deal. 10k dps in 10-man, he's 8-9% of the dps, which means he's dragging the entire group down in a BIG WAY.
I agree that getting 25 people to work together is harder than 10. However, if you're in a 25-man raid, you already have a larger desire to be there and work together, so this argument quickly becomes moot.
Getting 25 people online is easier than 10? DUH. If that's the argument, we should have 2-player raids.... It's a LOT easier to get 2 people together than 10. Sorry, had to say it. Again, we go to the fact that 25-man raids have 25 people that WANT to sacrifice time to raid, whereas 10-man guilds usually have 12+ people ready, so everyone thinks "There's more than enough tonight, I'll take the night off", and thus you end up with only 9 people online.... I've seen it a lot.
So far both arguments are almost useless because the people that raid 25-mans are usually the more "hardcore" than those that do 10-mans.... Any other thoughts?
Peter Feb 25th 2012 4:47AM
Having done both, usually as a healer, my $0.02:
10 is easier to coordinate people (on time etc).
25 has better loot distribution.. (7 of the last 8 weeks we de'd druid gear in DS-10 because we had no druid and we're cashing in rogue/dk/mage/druid tokens for vendoring while half the rest of the raid is in dire need of T13 tokens)
25 is smoother to heal, but blizzard scale up damage accordingly.
10 is easier to have a problematic raid comp for some fights. Homogenization only goes so far.
25 seems a bit rougher on more people's machines these days than it did before.
I'd rather be in a 25 group, but my home realm is so full of special kids that don't get along that so few seem interesting in trying to deal with the logistics.
I wish that they'd end trying to make dual-mode raids. Design for either 10, 15, 25 whatever and stick to it for the expansion. Having dual-mode raids is a pain to balance for. 10's are a little too small IMO. How about 15? Target something like 2 tank, 3-4 heal, 9-10 dps? Not 15/25 or 10/25 or 10/15/25.. Only do 15.
This discussion isn't new. The end of 40man raiding was also predicted to be the end of wow.
anthony.croft1989 Feb 24th 2012 3:20PM
from what i see 25 man raiding will be left for LFR and 10 mans will become the standard for progression raiding as it is right now. i dont see why they would remove 25 man raids if the fights are close to the same and the real difference is how much health the boss has.
Graylo Feb 24th 2012 4:13PM
The difference between 10 and 25 (in terms of experiance) is much more then 25mans having more health.
One of the big problems with the current set up is that they have to cram a 10man raid into a 25man environment. Take a look at the TBC 10man only raids Kara and ZA. One of the things that was awesome about many of those fights was that the 10man format fit the room, and Blizzard was able to limit the space available to the 10man raider. Try and use those same mechanics in the current 10mans and it doesn't work because they are in a 25man sized room. To be fair, while the environmental size tends to favor 10mans it does cut the other way some times. One of the main reasons hagara is so much easier on 25man is because 25mans have so many more people.
@Anne
Thanks for the links
Geiss Feb 24th 2012 3:22PM
"What I would hope for -- the only thing I can hope for -- is that Blizzard simply makes two different raid situations. Make it so players can choose one or the other, not both. If they want the convenience of 10-man raiding, they choose 10-mans. If they want the challenge of 25-man raiding, they choose 25-mans." ------------- isnt this already in place in terms of lockouts?
SparkysShocker Feb 24th 2012 3:52PM
Not quoting the full paragraph sure, but with the end of the paragraph...
"Each system has its own rewards and drawbacks, but what they have to be, in the end, is different. Distinctly different"
...That would be a NO.
Got to love it when people take bits and pieces of something to make an argument /facepalm
Z Feb 24th 2012 3:23PM
Currently my biggest issue is the different lockouts for heroic raids. We are a 25man guild working on heroic mode Dragon soul. And we sometimes struggle to get 25 people together, which is not uncommon to 25man raid rosters as you point out (especially this late in an expansion).
However, due to the heroic lockout mechanism, we can not do any heroic mode boss on 10 and 25man mode in the same week. If we get 2x 10man on Wednesday we're especially screwed: do we clear heroic modes that night, meaning the rest of the week will be 25man normal modes? Or do we just stick to 2x 10man heroic modes for the rest of the week, even if we have 25 people available on later raids? Or do we do normal modes on Wednesday, but then we clear the content too fast and our raid is done in an hour? None of these options is what we want, but they are all that is available to us.
Out of all the different reasons that 25mans struggle, I honestly feel that the heroic lockout mechanism is going to be the biggest contributor to us falling apart as a 25man guild.
thgilbert1 Feb 24th 2012 3:26PM
Removed 25 man groups and make 3 groups: 10man, 15man, 20man.
10 man = 2 pieces of loot per boss
15 man = 3 pieces of loot per boss
20 man = 4 pieces of loot per boss
Saves trying to make 25 man groups and also means if you currently have a 25 man group with people not showing up... 20 man is fine without needing to find more people.
15 man would mean there is a place in between 10 and 20 so that if people don't turn up you aren't forced to stop raiding completely
TimR Feb 24th 2012 3:56PM
But then they would have to design the encounters for 3 different group sizes. 2 is bad enough. Keeping 3 balanced would be impossible. I think eliminating 10 and 25 and just going with 15 would be a better option.
thgilbert1 Feb 24th 2012 4:28PM
Aye that could also work; or even just 10 man and 20 man :P why the random extra 5 ;)?
Minstrel Feb 24th 2012 3:27PM
I feel like the "why do 25 man raiding when you get the same loot?" question entirely misses the point of a game...the whole point of playing a game is fun. You should be doing 25 man raids if you find 25 man raids more fun than 10 man raids. They are pretty different raiding environments. I prefer 10 man, but I've done some 25s, and the entire reason I can have a "preference" is because there's a difference between the experiences, and I like one more than the other.
As a thought experiment for raiders...if the solo quests out in the world awarded the same "loot" as heroic raids, would you stop raiding and just quest, since the loot is the same? I certainly wouldn't...because I don't find questing to be even remotely as fun as raiding. It's not about the loot, honestly. The only reason I want gear from raids is so that I'm capable of pulling my weight in raids. The mere act of possessing loot doesn't do anything "fun." It just enables the fun of being able to raid.
So if 25 man raiding is dying out, perhaps the answer is not the loot equality (though 25 mans, as I recall, do offer a slightly higher loot-per-person ratio) but rather the fun of 25 man raiding is not sufficient to balance out the added hassle of putting 25 man raids together for most people. In which case, it's not an ideal format for most people, though obviously phasing it out will hurt those for whom the fun-to-hassle equation does come out on the positive side.
Just my thoughts on this long-standing issue.