If someone wants to succeed their key they yes, they better be able to read and find the important information, instead of just that score.
Good point, and I’m still missing KR and UR mounts 
That’s not an issue, it is understood that ratings stabilize after multiple games.
(And this time it was really the last post.)
At the end of it all, there are two ways for grouping to be a decent experience: either you play with people you know you will play with again, in which case it makes sense to explain things to them, to help them out to get better, because you too will reap benefits from that, even if at some future time, or you need some kind of system to make sure they have similar experience to yours.
The first way is through friends lists, guilds and communities, the second way is through something like RIO, arena and rbg rating, or something similar. Holding hands and singing kumbaya isn’t a viable option.
3 Likes
MMR is based on games/content where the aim is always to compete. That is not the case with Mythic plus. The score is a reflection of a players experience but I am not penalised for helping friends, guildies, community members do stuff where I know they are not going to succeed or do the content well.
My raider io score is not affected by those runs nor should it be. MMR system would literally exacerbate the problems people are facing now.
1 Like
For example Praetorian in RIO shows few things. They have done a lot of WS runs. And that with a close call runs, they have stood around. They have done few very fast runs.
Easy. Invite.
Literally. easiest decision to make.
Actually his RIO literally shows that this guy is worth invite to places. Even when he has not done 10+ on some places.
Earlier on armory view I wouldn’t invite him to some dungeons. But RIO shows his experience and most certainly there’s NOTHING speaking against him. Enough runs, enough stubbornness and likely will not bail out when things dont go fastest.
Yes. i read that out just from RIO.
Literally - RIO makes him look pretty decent vs. armoury view 
3 Likes
Then its simple, if they are like that then rio is not good tool for them… its like when you gief some toy to kid and kid start to do damage with that toy, what you do? you took that toy away…that exactly what need to happen with rio.
Indeed it literally shows how flawed the armory info is
1 Like
I do not know. I decided I just retreat and don’t play with jerks. I am afraid that if you take tool away, they make up something worse. Least now RIO allows good people see more and judge better. Like I showed above. I actually think you are pretty decent dungeon runner - would have spot in my runs if I’d run any.
I looked at your history and it showed some of your player character. You seem to be ok guy
There is a problem in PUgs people bailing out. Cloze call metric of 30 sec or less i.e. in Praetorians case shows the run was not smoothest or was slow. He was in it, till end instant +1 - as they say.
1 Like
Why do you insist in wishing to enter in garbage groups made by whiny kids is beyond me…
Yes some idiots do use rio like jerks & are asking for ridiculous scores … so what ? They are usually not pulling their weight & wanting a free carry anyways so good ridance
Personaly I am glad to not be accepted, because the chance the run end mid dungeon because of random ragequit is way too high anyways ( on weekly keys)
1 Like
I hate people who just bail because the timer isn’t going to be met and you’re close to the end.
I honestly don’t care about any of the failed runs on my io. I rarely bail on a group because it doesn’t affect me, it’s just my time I’m giving up.
You still haven’t made a single relevant argument to elaborate on this point while failing to deconstruct the notion that leaderboards help create a healthy competitive environment. Are you against “discrimination” in invite-only sports events as well or are you only marginally delusional?
There isn’t a “vast majority” of players who are hurt by the RIO system, you can’t just pretend that there’s a whole community behind the removal of competition from the game. Every single point you’ve made has been made using conjecture that there is a significantly larger playerbase who struggle to find groups and subsequently quit M+ when the biggest hurdles to get into M+ is the frustrations of timing and clearing a dungeon based on its difficulty.
You’re making your arguments under the unprovable pretence that “more people will do M+ without RIO” and using circular logic to perpetuate your own erroneous point. Say this is true, what do you make of the people who push beyond a +15? Even if they are a relative minority, should Blizzard not strive to appease the most active audience instead of trying to catch everyone?
Praetorian “explained” that he was rejected from a +16 WM because he was “discriminated against” when in truth the screenshot clearly shows that it was predominantly because he’s never timed a +16 WM, if he has, then his RIO score would be irrelevant in the eyes of that pug leader. You really have some serious reasoning issues here.
If you cannot accept that doing other dungeons help show your skill in M+ as a whole then you won’t find any merit to any system then basic reasoning is simply beyond you.
He is literally lying. Perhaps you fail to read. It’s sad that you don’t deal in truths.
That isn’t discrimination. That’s a fair indicative measure of your skill. You will be judged for being low ranked in any system with a rank, especially for a coop competitive environment you need to know who you’re playing with. If you think this is discrimination then the concept of ranked games in any game causes discrimination too? That, once again, is simply untrue.
And you aren’t just jumping on your anti-competitive bandwagon? He gave irrelevant specifics that like you said, are weak when taken in isolation. “I was rejected from a lot groups” is not a valid counter to any of the “pseudo-points” made. None of your points have had any semblance of logic thus far either. If you’re going to make vague counterpoints and group every argument you disapprove of under a banner then really you’ve disproven nothing except your aptitude for reasoning.
Hypocrisy?
Have you not seen how Praetorian makes personal attacks at everyone who talks against him or should I scroll up to find 10 examples for you for a start? You can’t argue against bias and then proceed to exert your own biases and expect anyone to take you seriously.
How else do you want RIO to measure your skill if not for the time and level of a key? Tell me there’s a better metric to be implemented where Praetorian will be accepted into keys he’s never timed before and still flourish. If I apply for a +28 and get rejected I don’t go complaining about it. “I have the ilvl for a +28” is irrelevant if you’re not skilled enough for it, and the best way to show that you are skilled is by having high keys completed on RIO or armory.
Literally the exact same thing that you’re doing. You’ve provided no facts, no reasoning. Neither you nor Praetorian know what facts are.
Conjecture.
He might deplete someone else’s key, so pug leaders are free to reject him if he can’t show that he’s capable - which he couldn’t.
It isn’t though? Without RIO we’ll just rely on another metric to see if a player is good enough for the keys we want to pug, and you’re definitely not going to make any friends if you deplete someone’s key, especially if like you said, they just want that weekly +15 completion and don’t want to spend an hour and a half for it.
Whiny casual players is the problem, perpetuated by Blizzard. I know how you don’t see it, because you’re part of the problem.
If you want to solo queue that’s fine but there’s no conflict with RIO existing still. This ludicrous line of belief that higher attendance = healthier community proves how disingenuous your arguments actually are. All that will achieve is that there will be more depleted keys or you’ll be stonewalled from doing higher keys completely.
RIO can actually promote newer players doing lower keys to bump up that RIO score and therefore increase participation if that’s what you want. You’re free to do lower keys for gear that you want instead of diving straight into +15s. It’s unfortunate that PvPers have to do +15s for their gear but you don’t go and complain about groups not letting me into their M N’Zoth kill if there’s a piece of gear you need from there, this is the same thing happening here.
You’ve routinely failed to explain how exactly RIO takes away from the community and directly reduces the amount of players in M+. Simply saying that it’s true when it’s pure conjecture is pretty pathetic to be honest, yet you ask for others to elaborate on their points in order for you to go through your own hasty generalisation.
LOL that’s every single one of your replies.
The lowest form of argument is creating a circular argument and flat out saying that you’re right because you’re so desperate to look like you’re right.
While a vivid analogy, this doesn’t make what he’s saying untrue.
There’s a clear progression path, you’re just refusing to take it. “I hate Carapace, but I want N’Zoth, let me just skip that boss and apply only for N’Zoth, no I don’t have AOTC to prove it.”
This is true, but until then, RIO is the best alternative available. No rating causes more chaos. It also goes against Praetorian’s hours of flimsy arguments and your notion that players don’t do M+ because of a rating.
How do you think RIO scores work? It’s literally just time + difficulty. There is no hidden MMR or glicko/elo score. Nothing snowballs. You don’t understand how the system works, get to know about it before complaining about it being an “amateur attempt” at a system.
Definitely beats first come first serve solo queue though, or any MMR system. It’s not a matchmaking system, you don’t know what matchmaking means. Matchmaking implies the use of an algorithm to systematically place players in the same group. That’s not what’s happening here.
RIO is used as a system to distinguish between good and mediocre and bad players purely by pug leaders on applicants or vice versa. The term “manual matchmaking” does not exist, because it’s an oxymoron.
You’ve been doing exactly the same as what you accuse others of. Tu quoque or what? ??? Delusional.
L
3 Likes
I only see leaving as justified when we’re spending an unreasonably long time in the dungeon and failing/wiping repeatedly. I leave in that situation unless it’s specifically a “weekly no leaver”.
I think if you join a push group and they are failing very badly people can feel justified at leaving. The group is not doing what it advertised.
Some groups just can’t get past certain things and there is nothing wrong with that either.
Like you say most ‘no leaver’ groups people try to stay although I have had the keyleaver leave before after the tank messed up too many times and he’d had enough. 
1 Like
Well sometimes things really do not work out. That’s one thing, but “OMG SURVIVAL HUNTER” or “OMG wr0ng route” leavers are another. Or those 1 wipe kind of leavers.
1 Like
Yeah I’ve had/seen my share of those. The funniest one so far was when a friend was doing his junkyard, their hunter ninjapulled a pack while the tank was pulling and the group was waiting for him to group up the packs so they can nuke them down with lust, and the hunter who ninjapulled, instead of dying and letting the pack he pulled reset, he popped turtle, ran into the tank with it, killing him and others, and then left the group. Good times.
As much as I can see both sides of the argument this isn’t fully correct. Up to a certain point RIO score is nothing more then a completion check, its only once that higher keys are included then it becomes more of an experience check imo. Experience would indicate that a player is competent at the level of dungeon they’re listing/applying for and that is far from what has happened in many dungeon runs.
Sure RIO is just a tool with information, however the bigger problem for me is the attitude of players when it comes to content like M+. The vitriol, judgements and quitting mentality I’ve seen in various groups over practically nothing shows far more about certain players than RIO ever can but these things can’t be checked when listing/applying for keys.
Ok let me explain you again…comment me on this: Damn when I need to quote myself.
Comment it smart rio fan
Not comparable, literally no one is saying that 1 person can’t be better than another while doing less keys.
But since the mark would be depleting my key i take the one that passed more times over books.
It’s always just a completion check. But it shows that the player has at least completed the dungeon. However experience is not necessarily equal to competence. It’s just much more likely that the player with more experience will be more competent than the other guy with little experience. But a player who has done 3 +25 keys is still probably more competent than a player who has done 150 +5 keys.