TBC Ideas, Stories, Anecdotes.........spill your guts here!

[TeaLeaf]

Well, let's start pulling together some comments and ideas in preparation for the TBC meeting as I am sure that we will not want to come across new ideas and information on the night of the meeting and then be expected to make an instant decision on them.

Post any notes, comments, info or queries here please.

TL.

[Sazgul]

Just a quick brainstorm.
 
Do we maintain raid days as they are?
 
Do we maintain the raiding of 40 man instances to a certin lvl (6X something)?
 
How much xp can one expect from 40 man?
 
Any point in doing 40 man (BWL+) - Any info on how the T2 gear is compared to lvl gear 60+?
 
What instances will there be in the expansion? (research, and im on it)
 
How should we organize our raidhgroups? 1-2-3-4?
 
Do we need raid groups anymore? - Maybe call this something else, since the "raid group" content will be for 70 only (maybe)
 
Bear with me, its just a spam of thoughts.

[TeaLeaf]

Current info suggests that some Blue L62 quest rewards exceeds Tier 2.5 items.  At the very least you ought to be able to blast through BWL with improved stats and health if you have not already cleared it.

Raid days will depend on what we raid and for how long.  What is clear to me is that I need to research the instances under TBC to see what they hold and how long we think they will take,  combined with how many members will be allowed in the instance (i.e. 20-25 person).

TL.

[Tanales]

From what ive learned all raid instances in outland will have a cap of 25 players, if its lower than that itll be 5-10 players.
I havent found anything about 20 man instances at all.
 
Tan.

[TeaLeaf]

I am expecting the loss of some ex-NG players at TBC (according to rumours).  Anyone else heard this also?  If so then it makes the transition potentially much smoother for us as we will have less to cram into a pint pot.

My own thoughts are that we would need to run 2 raid groups still, but we might have a bit more backup than we ever used to have in terms of numbers.  This might not be a bad thing though.  If we had say 35 in each raid group then that caters for most of the people who want to raid after allowing for some NG loss and what I expect will be some natural casualties who will use TBC as a reason to stop playing.  I do not expect the full Guild to move forward.

TL.

[TeaLeaf]

Hmmm, nobody else plan to comment?  The meeting is Friday, so spill your ideas here for people to consider.

As I understand it there are 25 person raid instances in TBC with variable loot tables depending on how you set the instance (Heroic being the highest).  

I think in a 25 man raid we have a much better chance of doing a better job and competing with the current top end guilds.

Should we raid more?  With a 2 raid groups we might be able to - we might even think about one that raids 4 times per week, the other 3 times.

I cannot see us providing 3 raid groups and I do not see only one raid group as viable.  It might however be possible to stagger attendance and enable two raid groups to raid 4 times per week, thus allowing most members of the current raid groups access to the higher level raid content.

Should we have a shadow priest in the raid groups?  This is a tough one and I  have to say that we might have to allow it during levelling.  But it will screw up our instance raids. When we know more about the instances and the fights I am guessing we will know more about the skills we need in the new instances.


TL.

[Tanales]

Well the only instances we will do during leveling will be 5 man, so the shadow specs wont be a problem, unless we want it to be.
I think we will have to stick with 2 raidgroups, ppl will leave in one way or another.
And im all for raiding more, id like 4-5 times a week, but i know some will have problems with raiding that much.

We will have plenty to do, there is 7 new raidinstances around the world, most in Outland. Taken from Raid - WoWWiki:

10, 70+, Karazhan
 25, 70+, Battle of Mount Hyjal
 ??, 70+, Zul'Aman
 25, 70+, Magtheridon's Lair
 25, 70+, Serpentshrine Cavern
 25, 70+, The Eye
 25, 70+, Gruul's Lair
 25, 70+, Black Temple

And there will be about 15 new 5 man instances, most grouped by 3 in the same enviroment,
wich some can be set at Heroic mode for thougher enemies and better items. I found this at Instance guide - WoWWiki.

Tan.

[Greatdanes]

I think one of the biggest thing for people atm is the uncertainty about the structure of SoG when TBC is out.
Maybe we need to let people get the felling of they have a chance to be a part of this progress, so I will suggest we open a category on the forums called TBC with a numbers of undercategorys like: raidgroup upset etc etc.
In that way people can give us their opinion and maybe give us some ideas who can be used in the future.

There is several ways to set up the raid groups and which one will be the best. None I think, there will in someways always be a minus with the model we pick but we can find the one with the smallest account of minus but maybe we need the people to help with that.
This is someways I have heard:
The first xx to reach level 70 will automatic get a spot in RG1.
Members of RG1 today will be RG1 in TBC minus some.
 
My idea is to say, all are equal and then let people apply for a raid group, maybe by using the sign up site so friends have a chance to get in the same raid group in TBC.

[Bastet]

I think as with the defender guardian ranking system start we should do a general reset and give members some plans to chose from.

[Sazgul]

I think as with the defender guardian ranking system start we should do a general reset and give members some plans to chose from.

That sounds like a good plan, and once again, I will suggest a change in RG names.
 
As Rg1 still sounds superiour(sp) to Rg2. Why not name them RG Alpha and RG Omega. This will ensure that one dosent seem superiour to the other and they start equal. This might also result in people on Aszune know who RG Alpha and Omega is, "wow its those cool dudes from SoG".
 
What do you feel about adding this in TBC raiding structure.

[TeaLeaf]

I don't particularly care what the raid groups are eventually called as they are internal names only.  People still say "wow its those cool dudes from SoG" whether they are looking at an RG1 member, and RG2 member or one of our alts. :norty:

Alpha & Omega sounds a bit poncy to me, but as they are internal names only then who cares.

TL.

[Greatdanes]

I think no matter what their will be called, there will after some time be a feeling of divide of the groups.
 
Can we in any way prevent that?

[Sazgul]

I think no matter what there will be called, there will after some time be a feeling of divide of the groups.
 
Can we in any way prevent that?

An idea would be to make one RG. Then make sign up's for 2 x raids every raidday. People the go sign up. This way we would make sure we get a good mix between people, and not the same people raid with each other every time. Each raid has a RL and Co-leaders named, and people can go sign up for the raid they like.
 
This has pros and cons. Pros as I see it, this will make the Guild feeling stronger, cons can be very hard to manage with "locked" situations. Unless we can make a system saying that;
 
"Karazhan 20th and 21st of June" - So when you sign up, you sign up for 2 raids.
 
But what do you say to this, One "big" raidgroup (about 64 people should ensure this?) - Was an alternative idea to the 2 x Raidgroups

[Bastet]

Some good ideas posted in this thread, keep them coming. Also with a lot of ppl taking a break from 4th - TBC launch, might it be worth considering expending the raid break till we can start in the new instance? or at least poll intrest for such a extention. (MC speed run will ofc happen, no matter what)
 
EDIT: I would like to make a post to members shortly (near end of raid break) with the plans we have for going into TBC.

[Bastet]

On the raidgroups names, one raid group will always be above the other, if only purely by the way the blizzard (liniar) guild setup works. Other then that i am open for all sujestions for rank names, and group names.
 
One thing we should also consider is raid times. The number of ppl that currently want to raid more then RG2 2 days is quite a lot. I would like to have the same (3) raid days (the ones currently used by RG1) for both (all) groups. I am hoping to still have 2, which seams to be the way it will go seeing the post here