Wednesday, November 10, 2010

The Essence of Pure 10

One of the unexpected side effects of our rather unique raiding schedule is that we really never get into 25 mans. I mentioned the term "pure 10" the other day, and one of our raiders actually asked "what does that even mean?" Totally a good question.

Basically, Jessabelle, Queen of Esoteric Statistical Musings, Keeper of the Spreadsheets, Protector of Random Self-Searching, alerted me a while back that our guild, The Lothar Swinger's Club, happens to be ranked as the number 1 pure 10 guild for our realm on a site called Guild Ox.  Check it out.  How she stumbled across that little tidbit is beyond me, but she does tend to keep her finger on the pulse of Azeroth, even when she's insanely busy and has no time to write (sadly).

In any case, you can see they've defined quite rigorously on that site what a "pure 10" guild is.  It really is an artifact of Wrath, and I think we've maintained our status by pure luck.  It's not like we forbid the running of 25 mans or anything.  Most of us just didn't have time, and our guild is more of an ad hoc collection of friends than anything with rules and regulations.  I mean, we're all officers (provided you have an authenticator).

Finding out we were the top pure 10 man guild on our server was sort of like winning a competition you, and most other groups, didn't know was happening.  Yet there we are.  It's a little something to be proud of.

It's not like we were gaming the system either. None of us geared really via 25s, though a few may have  popped in once or twice. To me, that still makes you pure 10. Experiencing different parts of the game is fine, the point is we never really benefited from the lopsided gearing of Wrath.  Considering how little we ran and how much we just had to gear on our own (via daily heroics and the like), I think it's completely fair to say we maintained pure 10 status.

Obviously, this sort of ranking will likely become a relic of Wrath. The way it's figured will have to change come Cat. I mean, since gear levels won't be different, it shouldn't matter as much. Winning will be winning.  Additionally, locks don't double up so you can't run both 25 and 10 bosses in the same week. Ergo, there really isn't a "gearing" benefit to running the larger raids like there was in Wrath.  No double emblem (or justice points now) earnings. With that in mind, it'll be interesting to see how we stack up against full time "raiding guilds" when we're on it from the start. I know we won't be "top tier" anymore - probably won't even make top 25 - but I'll bet we'll still surprise ourselves. .

I wonder if they'll keep a "pure 10" list. I think the stat I would love to see is one where they calculate your time spent in PvE raid groups, and divide that by progression somehow. Sort of like an "efficiency per hour" stat or something. I'd bet we'd stack up pretty well on that.  How crazy would it be if something like that became the new "hardcore" focus?  Where the top guilds weren't judged merely by how quickly they get through the face bashing in RL time, but by how quickly they learn and adapt; how well they plan and prepare.

Boy, wouldn't that be a whole new ballgame.  I'm not sure it would make anything more positive though.  If anything, it might make raiding more stressful, since people would inevitably be screaming "gogogo" more loudly.  Perhaps the best competition among WoW players is one in which the true criteria of judgment is unknown.  I suppose that could lead to it's own frustrations, but as gamers, aren't we just going to try to game any known system?  Is there honor enough amongst thieves and MMO-ers for a "fair fight"?  Or does it defeat the very foundation of gamer culture to be held to a standard where you're not expected to think outside the box?

For me anyways, I'm still experiencing a bit dragasmic from our Monday night kill.  I guess it takes a few days for the glow to wear off.  At least, that's what she said.


  1. Actually, Finwe was the one who alerted me to our elite 10 man status ;)

  2. Hrrrm, checking out that site, it lists my character in gear I haven't worn in months.

  3. Yeah, I guess for the rankings it doesn't rely on gear, but on boss killings. I claim no knowledge as to the officialism of the reporting... it's just a random site a friend told us about.

  4. I wonder what the Cata raid lockouts will do for this sort of thing.

    Personally, I'd rather see the 10s and 25s keep their separate lockouts. My main would run 10s in our guild and subbed in for 25s in another guild. We talked about this in our 10 man it was pretty much decided that we'd stick with this 10 man. So no 25s. I'm kinda sad about that.
    OTOH, I won't miss the drama about who gets the 25 slots at all. Not to mention the half hour to 45 min to get a 25 man together and in the instance.

  5. Yeah, I actually liked in TBC where you kept two max level toons if you did the whole sub for one, main in another. I guess it provided me encouragement to have my DK ready to raid. In Wrath, it didn't really matter because I could always go on my 'lock. I'm hoping that the different lockout system will be a good middle ground, providing more variety while not making it too hard on folks to field a team.

  6. For an altoholic like me the lockouts will probably have me playing my alts a lot more. It is like I'm going to end up with a 10man main and sub and a 25 man main. I don't ever recall subbing a alt in for a 25 man raid (outside of VoA which was pug central).

    In TBC I raided with my hunter and had a feral druid doing support. Then my guild asked me to switch my druid over to healing and get geared. So I did. I ended up with my resto druid being my main and my hunter subbing in. So I rolled a shadow priest to take up the support role. Oddly enough, my shadow priest picked up a disco off-spec and easily got geared running heroics. So about a week ago there was a LK attempt going and they needed something other than a resto-druid for a healer so my bank alt went... and won.
    I call my priest, "The most successful bank alt ever."
    I even have a decently geared pally tank now. Its not like I couldn't run four lockouts if I level them all. But that would just be a massive amount of raiding. I don't quite get Blizz's logic here. With the lockouts combined then chances are people will end up raiding more, not less, by gearing alts.
    I'll still guess that only the hard core raiders will run 25s as they are harder to put together and run as compared to a 10 man.

    I just don't get it.

  7. I think part of the idea was to take the pressure off individuals to run one toon through all of the locks they have 10 and 25. Sure you can run a second toon, but that's a whole second gear path, and you can't really transfer the points between characters. I'm sure there are some who will raid more, but with dual specs providing an easy method of flexibility, I think you would have to be extra dedicated to want to have a second toon "end game ready".

    At the same time, I totally see what you're saying. I guess I just think it has to do with expectations. It was "reasonable" in wrath to expect your raiders to use both locks on their main to maximize gearing potential. That, Blizz says is "wrong". It is unreasonable to expect everyone to have a stable of geared alt toons (not that people don't do it... it just isn't traditionally mandated by a peer pressure from a group to be "up to snuff"). This way, people who are okay with one toon have an excuse.

    At least that's how I understand it.

  8. Then maybe Blizz knows something I don't but I'll wager an ice cold lager that there are a helluva lot more casual 10 guilds than hard core progression guilds. Players in casual 10 guilds will almost never see a 25 man raid because of the new lockout system. It won't be because they won't go but because they can't.

    I guess I'll wait and see but I hope people get bored with running 1 lockout a week and the 10s and 25s get separated again.

  9. Tbh, it seems to me like a classic case of changing too many variables at once. If we accept that there was a problem with ppl being enticed to run "too much", then you could say that both removing different gear drops and merging the locks are "solutions". Both solutions are being implemented. If the problem is "fixed", then which one was the reason?

    I'd be okay with having separate locks provided they don't drop separate gear. To me, that seems the ultimate amount of free choice, though people still may be pressured to earn the extra emblems. Perhaps ppl should just learn to say when?

    Like you said: we'll just have to see how it plays out before we can really judge.