It is amazing that you said what I said in a different way, think you’re smart because of it and call what I said “dung”, even though it’s exactly my point.
I think the point was that differences in server populations affect the group building experience and the overall server community. Low pop servers are different from mega servers in these aspects. Krutoj was trying to make a point based on this fact.
We all know that no player has access to Blizzards official server traffic information but everyone has access to estimated server population. You stating this obvious fact gives off the impression you dont care about the point hes trying to make, but instead look for a superficial excuse to make his reasoning look unreasonable, while it isnt.
4 Likes
You must’ve been bullied a lot in school but not enough to straighten your stubborn low iq brain. People name you 10+ arguments and all you have to reply is "No man, that works fine for me! Never had issue finding group. Typing ‘inv’ is a freaking dope interaction. Go find a highest cliff in game and jump off it please.
Really why do you even answer to this guy? Let him play the game the way he enjoys it. If he does not like RDF/LFG or whatever it is called, well let him not use it.
Oh BTW in Beta you cannot use LookingForGroup chat channel without being listed in LFG tool. Not that it matters much, just saying. Also, you don’t even type “inv”. You can open the window find someone and press a button to invite him.
Forgot about the “Social part” of the new LFG tool! You can type in your listing a note like “SWP geared” (in the future I guess your gear score!). So that way you will not even have to talk. much like RDF that destroys the social aspect of the game 
1 Like
And he is correct. Where he is not correct is his assumption that you need to know 1500 players on a server. Because
- His Numbers are inaccurate and open for interpretation
- Artificially inflated for the argument.
Knowing a 100 by name is already enough to have a significant impact. As those 100 know some more people.
Let’s say only raid leaders talk to each other. Each one of them knows about 25 more people. If you know 10 other raid leaders and talk to them about someone misbehaving in any way, each of them relays the message to their raid, making it 250 players that do no longer play with that person.
250 is already a sixth of his 1500. If we now add in the fact that his numbers are quite likely inflated because of Twinks etc. then there is probably already a fifth of players that will not invite the Player into a group. 20% not inviting one into a group, chances are already, that one of these players is part of a dungeon group he wants to join.
Of course it’s not quite that simple as my “calculation” does not take into account the different circles that may or may not have any overlap. The Meta-Slaves usually have little overlap with experimenting players of fans of more unorthodox playing styles. And within those 20% many are probably not just going with 4/4 randoms but with others within these 20%, therefore not giving a “100% success rate”. But the impact is already there.
So his talk about knowing 1500 players is already quite wrong.
1 Like
Hi everyone! I made myself a one month break from WoW (and forums) and recently came back. I was surprised to see that RFD discussion is still on! I’ve read through it all, and would like to ask something: why are You still debating here?
At this point, do You hope (pro RFD) or fear (anti RFD) that Blizzard will go back on their plans and implenet it in one way or the other? Or do You hope to convince Your interlocutors that Yours is the right point of view/take on the RFD and the consequences of its implementation in the game?
This is not a troll comment, I am seriously curious 
I am still debating for two reasons:
-
To show activity in the forum and to signal to blizzard that there actually are people that are against RDF. Because as we know, it’s always the outraged ones that are the most active in the forums. Would Blizzard announce they are going back on their decision, and I think they somewhat did by introducing the other tool instead, the opposers of that decision would suddenly flood the forums.
-
You don’t debate on the internet to convince your opponent. You do it to convince the reader. So I want everyone who comes here to not just get a one sided view of certain issues. This topic is one of those topics.
3 Likes
I think this whole argument has a problem.
This my apply to raids in a sense, but not to dungeons. Does every raid leader small talk with every raid member about causal players, that dont even raid and that someone met in a dungeon? I doubt that every player having a bad dungeon experience goes to the raid leader and to report this “misbehavior” including names of players, so that the raid leader can take his time at the next raid to talk about all the bad guys in dungeons this week, so everyone is informed.
Or does anyone starting a random dungeon group has to consult the knowledge of a raid leader to get feedback about the behavior-history of a random player he doesnt know and he is about to invite? I have yet to hear about even one raid leader that takes his time to talk to every raid member about their dungeon experiences to make a briefing hour about all the bad experiences during the raid.
Regardless of Krutoj guessing the numbers correctly or not, the whole calculation about player you just made about raid and not dungeon group building. Even if you only make the whole point to show good networking between players, is not really plausible that each and every experience is shared and remembered by everyone connected by a raid leader.
2 Likes
No. It happens in a different way.
During raids many people just talk casually about stuff. And topics like the behaviour of a certain player do come up. When that happens, the whole raid can listen to that conversation, and get the information.
So to assume raid leaders would have to take time specifically for telling their raid to not play with Player X is wrong. It’s not how things happen. It also usually takes more than one account to make someone really shun a certain player. But that is the beauty of it. If you heard from someone that Player X did something, and now you hearing it again from your raid lead during a conversation, that makes you reluctant to take that person with you. And when it comes up during your Dungeon group, you might tell three more about what you heard about that player. So the news spread. It also takes multiple instances of misbehaviour from a certain player to create enough accounts that potentially reach one player. Therefore a single slip up is not robbing anyone from second chances. It’s really the multiple offences and consistent bad behaviour that ruins your reputation.
It happens more casually not through dedicated talking times regarding bad apples in the community.
So it’s no suprise that you have yet to hear about a raid leader that takes his time to talk to every raid member about their dungeon experiences. Because that’s simply not how it happens. And people who actually expect it to happen like this show that they might NEED the social aspect of the game to actually learn some real social interaction. Because this very outlandish expectation shows that they don’t know how social interaction actually works and takes place.
I dont understand why you try to argue here for minor points. Its still very unreasonable that every raider tells their stories and every raider listens closely and remembers all the names of good and bad players for a whole expansion.
While its correct its easier to remember occurrences, if you hear them multiple times, you have to be on a very small server that you are able to hear gossip about every toxic player repetitively, so its not representative for the playerbase as a whole, since most players play on bigger servers.
2 Likes
Really why someone being against RDF if this will not change their gameplay/experience? It is not mandatory. You can make the groups the way you are doing it now as you have described. Why interfere with others or how they would enjoy their gameplay if it does not affect you? It is the same as someone coming here and tells you that you are not allowed to search for party in chat, have friends or talk to others in a dungeon. You would not like that.
3 Likes
“not mandatory blah blah bah”
Isn’t this the 6th cycle of this point being debunked?
You can walk 20 miles to work every day or you can take the train. The train is bad for the environment and walking makes you more fit.
So why aren’t you walking?
4 Likes
I’m still posting on this topic now and then to show that it’s not a life or death issue for everybody. And that #NoChangers still exist. And that we in my eyes have bigger issues like the RP and Low pop servers being slaughtered, and …
Because I could not care less about RDF one way or another, but for #NoChange reasons I would like it to be added, not at launch, but somewhere near the halfway mark like it was originally.
To remind people, Blizz and other readers alike that we are some that still do remember how and when things happened in Wrath - sometimes refreshing my memory in the abundance of screenshots from back them.
2 Likes
Because it is a minor point with major impact.
And as I said before, it doesn’t even have to be “every raider” etc.
Once more you are exaggerating what it takes to have an impact. You don’t need to hear about every toxic player. Just enough people need to hear about every single toxic player. And those people don’t need to be the same 20%.
It completely suffices if every toxic player is roughly known to 20% of the server for them to get significant drawbacks of their behaviour.
I hope they will go back on the decision and implement RDF (with TP) as well as keeping the new LFG feature.
I don’t mind if they keep RDF server wide to please the people on the fence about it.
The tool in it self can be reworked to police bad behaviour.
RDF, for me, was incredible due to:
Combats gatekeeping.
QOL
Enabled me to farm and quest while waiting in que, and return to it instantly after dungeon is over.
Alt leveling friendly (low lvls).
Easier to rep farm.
Made hc spam viable content for me if I had reduced time to play, or if I needed a change of pace from raiding.
All this social aspect for me is nonsense honestly, RDF now will never be as RDF was back in the day, even if kept as #nochanges, because us players aren’t the same as we were back in retail wotlk. It might be worse, it might be better but we’ll never know unless they implement it.
P.S RDF doesn’t equal LFR, because wotlk isn’t cata kek.
P.P.S I probably won’t reply to replies.
7 Likes
Let’s just debunk it again.
If there is a walmart opening in your area, and you don’t like walmart, you could just not go there, right? Instead you go to the small shop you always went to.
Oh damn… Walmart has an impact on the environment. Others are going to Walmart and your favored little shop is now no longer making enough money to remain open.
But you COULD still not go to Walmart… you could… but you won’t… because you need groceries. But you could drive to the next town over. Only takes 20 minutes to get there… so… yeah you could just go to walmart and do your shopping in 15 minutes, or you could spend 20 minutes to get to the other shop, take 10 minutes to do your shopping and another 20 minutes to get back. And you add the cost of fuel to your grocery shopping.
I mean… you could… but will you?
Maybe that analogy suffices to show you how that “not using it” is not nullifying the impact something has on the environment.
2 Likes
And here we have the winner in how dose a server community work, although its usually guild officers and not raid leaders speaking together, we have it set up on Mirage Raceway that way, and when I played on Stonespine we also had it set up that way.
Hello Bizmark, interesting remark and analogy.
So, given an average walking speed of 5 kmph (I opt to use metric system), I would spend over 6 hours of walking to work (assuming it’s a two-way distance) instead of, let’s say, about 1 hour of going by train. This would further lead to me having to wake up at least 3 hours earlier and effectively leaving me with 2-3 hours of free time each working day (instead of 7-8). Sure, sometimes I would walk but definitely not every day (or, to be more precise, working day).
Now, let’s use this line of thought to compare the use of RDF and LFG (or any other group-forming technique):
- Would you rather spent 6x more time gathering people to run a dungeon or would you rather run more dungeons?
- Even if there are people going by train (ie., are using RDF), you can still walk (use LFG or other tools).
- By excluding the train (RDF) you are basically forcing everybody else to walk 6x longer to their work (group manually) leaving them no other choice than submitting to this status or leaving the job (quitting the game or not running dungeons at all). This leads to a decrease in number of people even willing to work with you.
In your example, you do not account for the cost of time. Each person has different preferences and that includes how they value their (free) time.
As for the environment effect, sure, it is worse. In WoW this could lead to ‘consumerism’ of dungeon content.
2 Likes
I’ll just quote myself here.
Of course “environment” is not talking about nature and protecting nature. Environment is how the Game is played, who plays it and our expectations of others playing the game.
This analogy is what you build an argument on, but the shop is still open. You can still use it, since you yourself are convinced that a majority of customers prefers small shops over walmart. If the majority prefers walmart, because its easier to reach, cheaper and has more to offer, why would a minority should have the right to protest against walmart and force everyone to have a long walk to the small shop instead? Currently many customers go shopping rarely, because of how much they think the effort of the small shop sucks.
So if you are right about numbers, you will still have the small shops open even if a walmart opens, since most walmart guys wont visit the small shops often to begin with. If given the choice most customers go to walmart once its open, why are you the guy protesting against the will of the majority, only for your personal shopping experience?
1 Like