Raid Composition - Page 2

Leviandan · 05/05/06, 10:23 AM

Originally Posted by Elerion,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:13AM

Of course we don't get tempted to stack groups to maximize totem use, but I've always preferred self sustained groups like Gurg says. It's more intuitive for the healers, and makes for a more universal setup.

It really is a no-brainer for alliance though, since you don't have to worry about who's getting totems :) I would see having a healer in each group as more efficient too, if we didn't have to be in the same group as a shaman to get his buffs :(

(Not whining, just pointing it out in a friendly matter! B) )

ex-Hagakure · 05/05/06, 10:26 AM

Originally Posted by delljit,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:11AM

I wish i could have tranquil air as often as i wanted.

Sometimes when I pull aggro or threaten too Gurgthock will give me tranquil air for a boss fight or two; then I just wand out of spite.

Nite_Moogle · 05/05/06, 10:33 AM

Originally Posted by Drizzles,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:10AM

Originally Posted by Nite_Moogle,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:06AM

We rarely raid without 8 shamans so pretty much every group gets totems. Sucks when plate and cloth are dropping hand over fist but it's hard to argue with in terms of effectiveness. Shamans are the Bards of WoW :/

That makes so much sense, and I never thought about it that way. Thanks :)

This is one of those things that looks better on paper than it tends to work out in the long run. Honestly, it drives me crazy. There is no denying that having totems in every group improves everyone in the raid, but having 8 of the same class in every raid means you need a pretty big bench unless you have super hardcore players. As a result we have shamans with a ton of DKP still wearing blues because mail doesn't get the drop quantity that say, cloth classes do due to the paladin/shaman divide. I really hope they improve stackability of Shamans in the revamp somehow. Coming from an EQ Shaman where more than 1 Shaman on a raid was generally useless going to 20% of your raid makeup being Shamans is almost comical.

tenarius · 05/05/06, 11:16 AM

Where's Wodin =(

Gurg, I have a question for you, and I know it's been covered to an extent in the past. How do you handle raid spots? Do you prioritize for a balanced group?

♦ Praetorian · 05/05/06, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by tenarius,May 5th, 2006 @ 11:16AM

Where's Wodin =(

Gurg, I have a question for you, and I know it's been covered to an extent in the past. How do you handle raid spots? Do you prioritize for a balanced group?

Somewhat. I usually aim for something like 6/5/5/5/5/5/5/4 with 6 warriors and 4 warlocks, but I'll skew that depending on signups. If we have 9 rogues who want to go and only 5 hunters, I'm not going to put all 5 hunters in while 4 rogues are forced to sit out. I'll probabably have 6 rogues and 4 hunters, for example.

Kaubel · 05/05/06, 11:36 AM

It's all pretty dependant on a number of factors.

First off, you obviously have to sign up. Next, the group composition is decided. Are we allowed balance or do we need a few extras of a particular class? Along with the previous consideration, we need to decide if we're going to speed through, or are we in a learning phase, or can we take our time and allow people to attend who are less familiar with the zone? If it's one or both of the former two, we usually reserve slots for those who raid the most and have the best equipment. If it's the latter, it's pretty much open to all who sign up (save a few who are really ill-equipped or inexperienced).

Once that's taken care of, an initial group is posted (most likely it's >40 people) and the folks from each class will decide who's going and who's sitting out based on previous attendance and/or equipment needs.

My answer's better than Gurg's, just FYI.

Jeht · 05/05/06, 12:01 PM

So you guys don't think the extra DPS that mages and locks can do with TA is worth tightening up the groups a little?

Maybe CTRA has spoiled me, but when I arrange groups I never do so with the intent of having a healer in each one.

Eliirion · 05/05/06, 12:07 PM

I find when i'm doing groups (providing you have a good balance, and you don't have weird situations like having 8 druids in the raid) I try to make each group as balanced as possible. This usually means a primary healer and secondary healer (Priest/Pally, Druid/Pally, Druid/Druid, Priest/Druid) for tanks at least, and then a little more sparse in the "leftover" groups.

Lots of the times I end up stacking 2-3 groups to improve melee. Alliance doesn't really have to worry about keeping a Pally (Shammy) with their dps, due to blessings being on anyone in the raid no matter the group setups.

(This grouping really only applies for trash though, as boss group setups tend to get a bit more funky)

Usually tank groups end up as:
Warrior
Priest
Pally
Warlock
*other* (often mages)

Melee Groups:
DPS Warrior
Rogue
Rogue
Hunter /w TSA
Healer

or in the rare cases of Feral druids, i'll get a healer from another group to watch a dps group and make it:
DPS Warrior
Rogue
Rogue
Hunter /w TSA
Feral Druid in Cat

Then it's pretty much a matter of letting each group keep themselves alive, and if at any time as a healer, if your group isn't taking any damage, watch other groups/tanks. (Or ask for help from other healers if you're falling behind on your tank).

hellsoap · 05/05/06, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by Hagakure,May 5th, 2006 @ 10:26AM

Originally Posted by delljit,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:11AM

I wish i could have tranquil air as often as i wanted.

Sometimes when I pull aggro or threaten too Gurgthock will give me tranquil air for a boss fight or two; then I just wand out of spite.

you have to just wait for the start to fight then scream "WHERE R MY TTOTAMS" in party chat until he gives them to you

• Relwin · 05/05/06, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Hagakure,May 5th, 2006 @ 9:26AM

Sometimes when I pull aggro or threaten too Gurgthock will give me tranquil air for a boss fight or two; then I just wand out of spite.

More like run to the other side of Huhuran with Tamuf. :angry:

Kaubel · 05/05/06, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Jeht,May 5th, 2006 @ 11:01AM

Maybe CTRA has spoiled me, but when I arrange groups I never do so with the intent of having a healer in each one.

Why not? Asking your healers to spend more time watching EM and the CT raid windows is a bad thing.

Jeht · 05/05/06, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Kaubel,May 5th, 2006 @ 11:14AM

Originally Posted by Jeht,May 5th, 2006 @ 11:01AM

Maybe CTRA has spoiled me, but when I arrange groups I never do so with the intent of having a healer in each one.

Why not? Asking your healers to spend more time watching EM and the CT raid windows is a bad thing.

why? I personally find it easier to prioritize healing targest with CTRA. Being able to put all the tanks or rogues or whatever in one "group," or being able to position the groups I'm responsible for together.

♦ Praetorian · 05/05/06, 12:26 PM

There's still PoH.

And you said yourself, "the groups I'm responsible for" -- clearly you need group assignments to make sure that through a lack of communication you don't end up with one warrior that has no one in range to heal him because everyone assumed someone else had it covered. And as groups shift and move and change assignments over the course of a run, I think that'd get confusing to maintain. It's far easier to just have the default assumption of "you heal your group."

And really, there's no cost at all to not giving mages/locks tranquil most of the time. They rarely need it. On the fights where they truly do, I rearrange groups so that they get it, of course.