There's one type of person in Wow who really get on my nerves. Basically, these are the types of people who actively speak out against trying something if the raid or group doesn't have the 'optimum' makeup.
For example, our guild was at Garr in Molten Core the other night. Garr has 8 adds. The 'normal' strategy is to tank four of the adds and Banish the other four. However, we only had 2 warlocks to banish. We did have 6 or 7 warriors and a strong amount of healing, so the fight was possible with a change of strategy. However, one player spoke up and declared that the fight was 'impossible' without the extra warlocks, and we shouldn't even try.
This timidity is the one thing that really bugs me in WoW. Why not try? The worst that happens is we wipe, and we count that as a lesson learned.
The next week, we had enough warlocks to do the fight normally, and we killed Garr. Thinking about continuing on to Baron Geddon, that same player says that we don't have enough Fire Resistance in the raid to continue. Argh! [1]
If we tried, wiped, and then came to the conclusion that we needed more Fire Resistance, that would one thing. But to be unwilling to even try?
You see this even in lower instances. People who won't do anything if the group makeup is not exactly correct according to perceived wisdom. Or maybe certain people have the wrong talents (Feral vs Resto druids, Shadow vs Holy priests, etc.).
It's odd, but whenever I've grouped with people from the very elite, cutting-edge guilds, they don't seem to adhere to this 'common wisdom'. Maybe it's because what I'm working on is trivial to them, but they seem to be more willing to try less conventional solutions.
[1] I do have to say that the player in question is a very good, solid player. I just wish he'd be a bit more willing or enthusiastic about taking risks.
Ha, same thing hapened to us 2 nights ago. We only had 3 locks, as opposed to the usual 5-6. I actually asked the question about whether we could handle Garr. The raid leader chuckled and said, "We'll know soon enough" - and then we proceeded to one-shot him with maybe 2 deaths.
ReplyDeleteI love unconventional groups (my favorite is healer + mage (me) + 3 hunters + tank pets), but Scholo pretty much requires a priest.
Until folks get comfortable with something they like the "rules".
ReplyDeleteDon't forget a wipe amounts to, what, 40-50g in repairs? Just that wipe. Spread over 40 people in good gear.
But, certainly, to have worked your way to Garr, only to stop because you're a 'lock or two short is dumb. There's always different ways to accomplish a goal.
And what l'emmerdeur said. One of my most fun Deadmines runs I did with my wife and 3 Hunters. I was in cat form, she, also a druid, was doing the healing. The pets were tanking. We made the place seem easy.
Well, it is a matter of degree, to a certain extent. If someone proposed that 10 of us should try Molten Core, I would probably say no.
ReplyDeleteBut some people are so unwilling, that you could say let's try with 35, and they'd still object. I just think that people need to be a little more flexible.
As for Scholo requiring a priest, the only fight of real concern in Scholomance is Alexi Barov. As long as you have some way of handling that fight, its okay.
I did Scholo once with warrior, warrior, paladin, paladin, and rogue. The paladins feared the adds and healed, while the warriors and rogue took down Barov.
Just the other day, a few people from my guild and I went to Strat Live and what did we have? Two pallys, a warr, a mage, and a hunter. The other pally healed and I tanked, and to our surprise, we made it to the Scarlet Sanctuary with little to no problem... that is, until we met Timmy, but what can you do?
ReplyDeleteWe never did get far in the Sanctuary, but we were pleased with our progress despite the odds. We're gonna give it another shot next week, hopefully, and maybe, just maybe, I'll get that silly Hammersmith quest done. :p