Defining "Mains"

Monday, October 5, 2009

For those of us altoholics with multiple lvl 80s, defining a main is a hard thing to do. Browsing through the Guild feature of WoWheros reveals the simple fact that gear score simply isn’t the answer to the question. 'X' has 3 of the top 10 toons in the guild, from a gear standpoint, all separated by a few points. All of these toons can perform multiple roles, further complicating the question (DK: Tank/DPS, Druid: Tank/Ranged DPS, Shaman: Heals/Ranged DPS).

Svenn has 4 lvl 80’s and another 2 on the way up. From a gear score/lvl of play standpoint Cromm (Destro lock) is his best toon, however, multiple attempts to raid on Cromm have met with failure. For whatever reason, Svenn brings a greater synergy to the raid than Cromm and thus has been identified as his de-facto “main” (must be those tasty Pally Buffs).

While this is, at times, frustrating, he still rather enjoys tanking on Svenn and understands that it is for the good of the raid -and this blog:). The trouble lies in Raiders who are not happy in their "main's" current role, whom have alternate 80s at their disposal. There is a feeling that these toons should be entitled to raid access as well, and THEY SHOULD - to an extent….

IF:
  • An alternate player with the requisite gear/skill set is available to fill the position. (ie. 'Y' fills in on heals so 'Z' can DPS on 'A').
  • The Alt meets “minimum” dungeon requirements, understanding that some minimums are more flexible than others (ie. Tank Defense Cap vs. DPS output- though DPS should be able to “keep up”).
  • The swap of Main to Alt still provides the desired raid utility (this is also a squishy concept which plays into group synergy, buffs/de-buffs, class presence, etc.)


The summation of the above provisions can be looked at as: Does the switch Help, Hinder, or Harm the raid? Helping the raid is always a good thing. Hindering the raid is ok (not desirable, but understandable), minor setbacks can be worked through if the current role has led to burnout or just plain misery- the point is to have fun and see new content together. Hurting the raid should be avoided at all costs, while it may make the experience better for the individual switching, it will make the others in the raid work that much harder and decrease the collective enjoyment.


Raiding is a corporate activity and as such it is incumbent upon raiders to help each other out. If a toon switch is what is necessary to continue enjoying raiding than, it should be accommodated (within reason). That may mean ponying up some of your time to run some heroics for gear/badges to get the “alt” up to snuff- something multiple raiders can pitch in on. It also means some work on the part of the raider switching; pass on their knowledge of their current raid role to their “heir-apparent”, and to do the work of figuring out their new class’s role in the raid and how to maximize their performance in that role. This will minimize disruption to the raid as well as alleviate any hurt feelings on the part of the raid as everyone will have done their part to ensure continued success.

* This does not address the investment the guild has made into the raider's previous "main" through drops, etc. But, as the old main will still be present in the guild, the issue is not as important; the guild will still have access to that toon should the need for it be unavoidable.

Sorry for the wall of text. Thoughts? leave a comment

Comments

One response to “Defining "Mains"”
Post a Comment | Post Comments (Atom)

Inno said...

I came, I saw, I commented.

October 5, 2009 at 4:27 PM

Post a Comment