Jump to content


Photo

GuildOx - Guild, Character and Loot Rankings


  • Please log in to reply
170 replies to this topic

#21 Daraberry

Daraberry

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 30 April 2010 - 02:49 PM

There's just under 10,000 guilds that are 10m strict progress ranked and about 20,000 guilds that 10m strict achievement ranked. I am not sure where you are getting the '200' figure from.


Looking over it again, my number is probably pretty off. I forgot that you were still including TOGC in the rankings. Essentially I looked over the top 100 in Europe and US (the other two regions had only a few). The guilds at the bottom of those two rankings hadn't cleared anything in quite a few months. Most were Dec or Jan, kills of Storming the Citadel. Imo if a guild did Storming the Citadel that early but hasn't progressed since then with the 5%, 10%, or 15% buff, they probably are not raiding anymore. There might be exceptions.

Anyway, do you have a count on how many of the guilds in your list are actually still raiding?


It's not just the level of the drops, it's the range. Some stuff doesn't drop in 10 man until later on in the progression cycle (caster shields don't appear until Sindragosa, for example).


I don't know if a 25 man boss early on drops a caster shield or not, but I do know that Anub Heroic drops a 245 shield that is pretty equivalent to the Sindragosa one. Which is what I still use for healing, even though we're 10/12 Heroic


Allowing people to PuG parts of ICC25 and still stay on the list would also "force" all 10-man guilds who wanted to stay "competitive" to do the same. The entire point of the 10 strict ratings is to have a way for people to compete without bothering with 25-mans. Optimally you would just check the gear at the moment of the kill to make sure no 25-man items was used, but until Blizzard makes this possible I don't think there is much you can do.


That makes sense to some degree except for one major thing. Your statement seems to assume people can't currently pug it. As it is right now, 7 people in a guild can clear LK every week in 25 man and you could still fall into 10 man strict.



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.


I guess it probably won't be as big a deal for us, we're still at 5, so we can still recruit 2 more without worrying too much. I still think we could remove the restrictions on the first wing though. The current system can be abused at the moment anyway, and allowing 10 strict guilds to recruit from people who have cleared the first wing would still be way less of an advantage than someone that really wanted to game the current system.

#22 Kilted Raven

Kilted Raven

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 01 May 2010 - 11:32 AM

Looking over it again, my number is probably pretty off. I forgot that you were still including TOGC in the rankings. Essentially I looked over the top 100 in Europe and US (the other two regions had only a few). The guilds at the bottom of those two rankings hadn't cleared anything in quite a few months. Most were Dec or Jan, kills of Storming the Citadel. Imo if a guild did Storming the Citadel that early but hasn't progressed since then with the 5%, 10%, or 15% buff, they probably are not raiding anymore. There might be exceptions.


I think that's more of a quirk of the way the ICC achievement brackets have been set out than anything else.

We did Storming the Citadel ages ago, Festergut and Rotface have been in the bag for a while. We're comfortable on Valithria, and probably getting Blood Princes tonight. But until we move on to Sindragosa/Blood Queen/Putricide and get another wing down, we look no more progressed than guilds who are only just past Saurfang. If you looked at the ranking tables you'd think not much was going on, but it's just that Blizzard have set the achievement breaks at the end of each wing, and with 3 open wings it makes more sense to work on the other bosses first.

Based on our server and others I've looked at, there seem to be a lot of strict guilds who sail past Saurfang and are sitting somewhere between there and the Sindy/BQL/Putricide levels.

#23 Lirath

Lirath

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 01 May 2010 - 06:03 PM

I don't know if a 25 man boss early on drops a caster shield or not, but I do know that Anub Heroic drops a 245 shield that is pretty equivalent to the Sindragosa one. Which is what I still use for healing, even though we're 10/12 Heroic

That makes sense to some degree except for one major thing. Your statement seems to assume people can't currently pug it. As it is right now, 7 people in a guild can clear LK every week in 25 man and you could still fall into 10 man strict.

I guess it probably won't be as big a deal for us, we're still at 5, so we can still recruit 2 more without worrying too much. I still think we could remove the restrictions on the first wing though. The current system can be abused at the moment anyway, and allowing 10 strict guilds to recruit from people who have cleared the first wing would still be way less of an advantage than someone that really wanted to game the current system.



Lord Marrowgar -

Quite unfair to pug first boss in ICC25 and get better caster shield than 10man strict guild members can get from Sindragosa and only from her.

This is the system Polar came up with to somehow separate pure 10man guilds from others, it is not perfect system but since Blizzard is not doing anything about it, at least not in this expansion (fingers crossed for Cata) and non of us has some better solution to this problem we should just follow.

#24 rbbrdckybk

rbbrdckybk

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 59 posts

Posted 03 May 2010 - 06:05 PM

If I do this then there is a chance that some 25m guilds that have only managed to run the first 4 bosses might start appearing on the 10m strict rankings. While it is not a big issue for those 10m strict guilds that are into the heroics, it might annoy some of the lower ranked strict guilds. What do people think?


I'm personally of the opinion that "strict" should mean "strict". Not "I'm going to arbitrarily draw the line here". I think the guildox strict-10 ranking list would lose it's value if guilds with current-tier 25-man gear started showing up on it with the author's blessing.

#25 thefool808

thefool808

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 40 posts

Posted 05 May 2010 - 11:28 PM

First of all, on your realm it looks like the farthest progressed guild (Way of the Warrior) is showing as the top ranked guild on guildox. They also have all the realm first kills in ICC.

I think ToGC was removed because it didn't make sense as a progression step. Therefore, newer guilds would be forced to go out of their way to run it simply to get up in the rankings (like you guys did). However, it made the most sense for guilds trying to progress the farthest to go straight to ICC from ToC, thus people with older progress in ToGC would overshadow guilds that were farther progressed in ICC (the current pinnacle of progression).

If you are having boredom issues but haven't cleared ICC then you can always work your way up the achievement ranks. To work your way up the progression ranks, you should work on progression.

#26 CrazyDymond88

CrazyDymond88

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 06 May 2010 - 01:10 AM

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.

#27 Lirath

Lirath

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 06 May 2010 - 07:04 AM

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?

#28 Kilted Raven

Kilted Raven

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 36 posts

Posted 06 May 2010 - 09:58 AM

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.

#29 Polar

Polar

    GuildOx.com Author

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 02:48 AM

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?
Author of guild, toon and loot ranking site GuildOx.com

#30 Lirath

Lirath

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 05:46 AM

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.

#31 Ukerric

Ukerric

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 365 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 11:47 AM

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)

#32 Belegûr

Belegûr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 148 posts

Posted 25 May 2010 - 02:17 PM

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.

#33 Daraberry

Daraberry

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 28 May 2010 - 06:45 PM

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

#34 seqo

seqo

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 13 posts

Posted 31 May 2010 - 02:42 AM

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.

#35 Polar

Polar

    GuildOx.com Author

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 01 June 2010 - 04:02 AM

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.
Author of guild, toon and loot ranking site GuildOx.com

#36 Vulgrym

Vulgrym

    Your Huckleberry

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 02 June 2010 - 06:40 PM

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.

#37 Tinwhisker

Tinwhisker

    Bald Bull

  • Members
  • 1032 posts

Posted 02 June 2010 - 07:11 PM

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.

#38 diemor

diemor

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 13 June 2010 - 10:45 PM

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.

#39 Onyki

Onyki

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 58 posts

Posted 15 June 2010 - 01:11 PM

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".

#40 Polar

Polar

    GuildOx.com Author

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 16 June 2010 - 04:40 AM

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.
Author of guild, toon and loot ranking site GuildOx.com




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users