May News/Discussions

[Chesspiece_face]

But why would you bother doing a 25-man if you could do two 10-man locks with the same group of people, get twice as much equivalent loot, and continue on your merry way? As noted in your quote, the powergamer views things from an "economic" point of view, and the clear choice between receiving two carrots and one is two. :lol:

Again, stemming from the risk vs reward objective analysis, if 10-man loot = 25-man loot, 25s will never be run. Or at least will be about as common as "old world" runs - things people do for the hell of it once in a blue moon, but not "srs business".

Which is exactly the point. If we assume that by introducing equal loot in 10 man instances as there is in 25 man instances would turn the 25 man instances into ghost towns than that just goes to show there is an inherant problem with the design of the 25 man instances. I agree with Skan above insomuchas that 25 man instances should, in their own right, provide an enjoyable enough experience that were they to offer relatively equal rewards people should still want to do them! If, as it stands, (and is my, and i believe sirlin's argument) the removal of the loot benefit from 25 man instances would remove the desire of people to play that content it just shows that there is a problem with the design of that content.

You offer the example of "why do a 25 man when you could do 2 10 man instances in that time!!!!" but that argument still relies on the faulty idea that the instances need to be designed the same way they are now (because of the loot progression). But there is no reason why there can't be 10 player instances which take just as much time and effort as a 25 player instance. The only reason it's like that is because of loot progression.