Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Polar

GuildOx - Guild, Character and Loot Rankings

171 posts in this topic

Naw man Presence of mind had the first lich king kill on this server hands down. And i wasn't saying that we were bored, but that it could be used in other guilds that may be getting bored of icc. I guess I can understand where you're coming from that some people could see it not being fair if they make a new guild and just run icc, that they'd still be held behind other guilds that were around for togc. However I still disagree, and believe that new guilds should have to run the older dungeons in this expansion to be ranked above the older guilds that spent the time and worked on them when they were harder. A brand new raiding guild for instance, who's taking down up to even Festergut in icc 10, certainly should have no problem going into naxx or ulduar 1 time a week (like we did) to get that progression under their belts, and I still feel it should be mandatory if you are to be considered a top guild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but I must disagree.

Althought we had found ourselves in exactly the same situation when our guild was #1 on server thanks to Ulduar hardmodes that no one else but us have done and we dropped to #3 when old content was removed, I still find it more fair and more current just to focus this rankings on the latest PvE content only.

Same as doing Ulduar hardmodes has no value anymore, ToGC is not being run for progress reasons anymore and running it just to get extra GuildOx progression points is exactly what Polar is trying to avoid, not to force guilds to run older content for the sake of improving their rankings. It sucks that you lost your points for ToGC but let's be fair to newly formed guilds who will skip ToGC as we have already discussed in this thread.

However I still disagree, and believe that new guilds should have to run the older dungeons in this expansion to be ranked above the older guilds that spent the time and worked on them when they were harder. A brand new raiding guild for instance, who's taking down up to even Festergut in icc 10, certainly should have no problem going into naxx or ulduar 1 time a week (like we did) to get that progression under their belts, and I still feel it should be mandatory if you are to be considered a top guild.

Do you honestly believe that spending evenings on Yogg+0 or Algalon or AnubHC should be considered as a progress when there is LK and ICC HC? Getting all old content progression points would cost you some first kills (within your ranking pool) in ICC which would at the end result in two guilds having exactly the same points but the newer guild would be behind because they were too late on ICC kills due to their farming of old content points. As I said, we lost our old points aswell and it wasn't nice but majority already convinced Polar to remove it.

EDIT: You can't really compare older guilds who have cleared Ulduar hardmodes when they were current and hard and newly formed guilds who would only fly throught there nowadays. So what is the point of forcing new guilds clearing all WotLK PvE content than?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view would be that kills on older content would be managed better by the 10 man strict achievement listing, rather than the progression listing.

Strict progression listings are precisely that and focused on the current raid tier, while the strict achievement listings give a more rounded view of the guild and its capabilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just as an update -

I am expecting that 10m strict will be no longer required for Cataclysm due to the changes in the 10/25 instance lockouts and the same loot that will be dropping for both. Consequently, I am not going to release the new system that I spoke of earlier. I am going to run with the current 10m strict system until Cataclysm is released.

Out of interest, what do people think about the need for 10m vs 25m progress rankings come Cataclysm? If the same loot is dropping in both and the achievements will be common between 10m and 25m raids, does it still matter to split 10 and 25?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
does it still matter to split 10 and 25?

In my honest opinion it does for several reasons.

1) I am not 100% convinced that 25m and 10m difficulty will be equal.

2) Current 25m guilds that can split into two 10m groups if needed will be gearing up faster than current 10m strict guilds that rely on one strong 10m group.

3) There will always be people who will never consider 10m raiding anything more than just a training ground for "real" 25m raids.

Indeed 10m strict will not be needed in Cata, but I'd suggest making 1 general ranking for all guilds on the server and than 2 separate rankings one for 10m and other one for 25m, so 10m guilds can still compete with 25m guilds but can still track their 10m ranking for the reasons mentioned above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the same loot is dropping in both and the achievements will be common between 10m and 25m raids, does it still matter to split 10 and 25?

The question may be moot anyway.

For one, remember that the achievements will be common. There won't be a "Sulfurized - 10 man" for those who do 10-man Sulfuron Keep vs the 25-man one, there will be a "Sulfurized", period. On the same tag, you get the same loot, same achievements (already announced), and maybe even the same kill summaries (probable, given the above) : how will you be able to distinguish a 25-man kill from a 10-man one?

(disclaimer: the achievement name is, of course, completely my invention)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess you'd easily distinguish by seing how many people have the achievement or how many got it at the same time. I think it's important to add some sort of visual feature so players can know whetehr the guild they're checking out is 10 or 25, but outright separating them seems pointless to me - not to mention it's precisely what Blizzard seems to be trying to steer away from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's not quite true - if a person leaves the guild and you have not yet been excluded then they no longer count towards your total. The 'stict checker' page sometimes lags by a couple of days - it is purely cosmetic though.

So, we removed one of our members a few weeks ago for attendance reasons and I was expecting him to drop off our list that counts against our 10 man strict checker. After a couple of weeks he didn't drop off, and then after getting a new boss down with him gone, he still hasn't dropped off.

So, I was wondering if this is a bug or if this statement is really true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We found it to be true.

A non-regular raider's alt pugged first wing 25ICC. We subsequently removed him, and he no longer appears against the Strict Checker - this is in the last fortnight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, we removed one of our members a few weeks ago for attendance reasons and I was expecting him to drop off our list that counts against our 10 man strict checker. After a couple of weeks he didn't drop off, and then after getting a new boss down with him gone, he still hasn't dropped off.

So, I was wondering if this is a bug or if this statement is really true

Try hitting the "update now" option and then give it 60 mins. This forces the strict checker to refresh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Out of interest, what do people think about the need for 10m vs 25m progress rankings come Cataclysm? If the same loot is dropping in both and the achievements will be common between 10m and 25m raids, does it still matter to split 10 and 25?

It absolutely does matter.

Setting aside whether Blizzard will be successful with (or adhere to) their current plan of equalizing the difficulty of the encounters themselves, they've already acknowledged the organizational complexity of the 25M format by planning for a 'more loot per player' model as reward -- a very controversial preliminary decision to say the least (longest thread in their Archive by a mile: World of Warcraft - English (NA) Forums -> Cataclysm Raid Progression Refinements).

Nothing is etched in stone, yet. Frankly, I don't see how they equalize the difficulty of the encounters in the first place without dramatically lowering the bar on 25M Hard Mode versions, but we shall see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nothing is etched in stone, yet.

That's true and not true. Blizzard is known for not posting anything until they're sure they're going to do it. That's not saying they won't change it in the future if/when it fails horribly but I'd put dollars to pesos that what they posted in that thread is what we'll see in the first tier of 4.0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that the idea of letting the first four bosses of 25 man be puggable by everyone kind of ruins the idea behind 10 man strict.

I enjoy this ranking system because I refuse to deal with 24 other people just to get the best loot or see the "real" content.

In my opinion, you could actually trim off some of the people who push 25 man content with the max people in order to get a higher strict ranking simply by dropping the number of people allowed to get Marrowgar from 7 to 6.

*shrug* just my 2c.

Really excited to see what kind of changes the revamping of raiding in Cata does especially with 10 man strict progression guilds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, you could actually trim off some of the people who push 25 man content with the max people in order to get a higher strict ranking simply by dropping the number of people allowed to get Marrowgar from 7 to 6.

*shrug* just my 2c.

I think the opposite.

And to be honest I dont see the logic in putting so much power into Marrowgar (8/8 triggers actually) when any other tags are requiring 14/9.

Unless I'm missing something on how "triggers" are actually triggered ^^.

In a side way, maybe you could check how many times a player actually killed a specific bosses in 10 and 25 then trigger his raiding preference through an acceptable ratio.

For example, if someone killed marrowgar 20+ times in 10 normal/HM, and 1-3 times in 25normal, I dont feel this player is out of the "strict 10 rules".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not planning to change the 10m strict system at this stage, mainly because it will no longer be required when Cataclysm is released (provided the Blizzard team stick to their current plans). I am the first to admit that the current system has some shortcomings - but there is no perfect solution given the limited info we can gleam from the wowarmory.

That being said, I am about to enable a GuildOx "10m Casual" ranking. Many guilds have slipped off the 10m strict charts but they would still like to see, roughly, how they would compete.

A sample of the new 10m Casual ranks can be seen at 10-man Progress - GuildOx - WoW Guild Progress, Character and Loot Rankings

How does it work?

It includes all guilds where their 10m world ranking is at least 5000 positions better than their 25m world ranking. All other guilds are excluded.

Will it replace 10m strict?

No, it is not designed to replace the 10m strict rankings. I do not plan to be offering banners or sigs for 10m casual, nor do I plan to list all achievements for the casual ranks. It serves as a very rough comparison for guilds that don't make the cut for 10m strict. In any case, it will also be obsolete when Cataclysm is released.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few people have contacted me regarding Halion and 10-man strict exclusion.

Yes, Halion 25 will exclude you from the 10-man strict rankings since it drops iLvl 271 gear (iLvl 284 in heroic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A few people have contacted me regarding Halion and 10-man strict exclusion.

Yes, Halion 25 will exclude you from the 10-man strict rankings since it drops iLvl 271 gear (iLvl 284 in heroic).

While I agree that Halion 25 should exclude people from 10-man strict (since it is a 25 man raid), it can't simply be based on item level. Halion 25 regular and Halion 10 heroic both drop the same item level gear, so item level 271 gear is available to 10 man strict raiders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since GuildOx doesn't exclude people based on item level but based on achievements/boss-kill statistics, your point is moot. Whether 10H drops the same item level as 25N doesn't matter, it's different items (eg. 10-man raids won't drop higher level trinkets than 264 until Cataclysm) and you're not supposed to increase your trophy/badge/gear income by running 25s alongside of 10s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since GuildOx doesn't exclude people based on item level but based on achievements/boss-kill statistics, your point is moot. Whether 10H drops the same item level as 25N doesn't matter, it's different items (eg. 10-man raids won't drop higher level trinkets than 264 until Cataclysm) and you're not supposed to increase your trophy/badge/gear income by running 25s alongside of 10s.

Correct. It drops higher level gear than what you get in ICC 10H so it is excluded.

To explain a little further, the intent is that I don't want to be forcing 10m strict groups to run 25 man content just to remain competitive. If I were to allow Halion 25, then all of the 10m strict raiders would be forced to assemble Halion 25 groups to get the (better) gear to stay competitive - I don't want this to happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not see that Ruby Sanctum is a part of the Progression Rankings. If RS will trigger us on 10m strict, why would it not be considered progression? I don't think the fight is overly complicated but neither is the Lich King at this stage of ICC (25%). Could we please consider having Ruby Sanctum a part of progression ranking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not see that Ruby Sanctum is a part of the Progression Rankings. If RS will trigger us on 10m strict, why would it not be considered progression? I don't think the fight is overly complicated but neither is the Lich King at this stage of ICC (25%). Could we please consider having Ruby Sanctum a part of progression ranking

The fact that RS triggers 10m strict exclusion has no relevance to whether it is or is not considered in the progression calculation.

That being said, I don't intend to add RS the progression ranks. I want to keep ICC as the main measure of progression until Cataclysm is released (which should not be far away now - given the recent beta announcement).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That being said, I don't intend to add RS the progression ranks. I want to keep ICC as the main measure of progression until Cataclysm is released (which should not be far away now - given the recent beta announcement).

You'll get no grief from me, I thank you much for the work that you've done on creating and maintaining Guildox.

The decision to not track it is unfortunate though considering that RS10 is proving to be a stumbling block for a number of guilds right now. I'm not aware of a 10 man strict guild that has taken out Heroic RS10 yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

honestly surprises me that Heroic Arthas is still alive in strict 10 with how lenient it is. You could literally field a team of full 277s and still qualify as strict 10 as long as some guild members were able to sidestep marrowgar kills or you just had an outside-of-guild raider or two.

I guess its somewhat refreshing that those competing in strict 10 are at least somewhat playing by the spirit instead of simply by the rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
honestly surprises me that Heroic Arthas is still alive

Great news! We had our first 10m strict guild kill him yesterday - The Typhoon Struggle of Defias Brotherhood-EU. Here is a quote regarding the challenges of 10m strict from their GM, Sheeana:

One of the biggest challenges as a 10 man strict guild is the limited roster - you often only have 10-12 people to pick from. In our case we don't have any Paladins or Death Knights so that presented our first big challenge on the Lich King heroic fight. Everywhere we looked people talked about using Paladin/Priest combo as healing setup. Rather than messing with our roster we decided to have faith in our healers abilities and felt certain that they, along with some tweaks, could make up for the lack of a Paladin.

On a slightly different topic, if any of the 10m strict guilds want to see how they are doing with respect to killing Halion then you can see the 10m strict world kill list here The Twilight Destroyer (10)H - GuildOx - WoW Guild Progress, Character and Loot Rankings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Polar,

I was wondering if you'd had any thought on how you might handle prereq kills in Cataclysm. By which I mean the new normal/heroic model seems to be the way forward for Blizzard, and it includes locking heroic content until the normal instance is cleared, usually by one person. At the same time, heroic mode can be toggled on a per-fight basis allowing unlocked guilds to pick their heroics rather than do them in strict order.

But we're seeing on our own rankings a lot of strict-10 guilds who haven't killed LK, but are taking in a Kingslayer and knocking over easy heroics like Gunship, then picking up kill credits. Other guilds with a more strict approach are leaving heroics alone until Arthas is dead.

Obviously there won't be any difference between strict and non-strict guilds in Cataclysm, but I wondered if there's a stance on allowing credits for guilds who have bypassed the prerequisites. On the one hand they made a legitimate progression kill, but on the other they're somewhat cherry picking the easy fights out of order, either in 10s or 25s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.