Greetings, fellow gamers! As a top leaderboard player in various games, I’ve been deeply involved in WoW’s Mythic Plus system. I want to share my insights and propose significant changes for a better gaming experience from a non-wow player’s perspective. Also, Blizzard if you’re hiring, I’d be more than happy to implement many of my ideas to your game(s).
Section: Identifying the Core Issues
1. Inconsistent Grouping Experiences
Summary
Problem
Difficulties in forming and joining groups, leading to unpredictable experiences.
Discussion
Players face difficulties in both creating and joining groups, leading to unpredictable and often frustrating experiences. This inconsistency persists even when utilizing community resources like guilds and Discord servers.
Example(s)
Despite joining numerous communities, the experience mirrors that of LFG, lacking consistency and long-term team formation. The tendency in these communities is towards forming temporary groups, akin to LFG, rather than cultivating steady, reliable teams. Rarity of playing with the same people more than once or twice, despite efforts to engage with community members.
Players often find that there is little incentive to build rapport and synergy with the same teammates, as there’s always an availability of other players to group with.
2. Inadequate Skill Measurement
Summary
Problem
The current IO rating system does not accurately reflect true player skill.
Discussion
The current IO rating system fails to accurately reflect a player’s true skill level, as it only accounts for key completion and not the quality or consistency of performance. It does not decrease or adapt based on unsuccessful runs or poor performances, leading to a skewed representation of a player’s actual skill and consistency.
Lack of Performance Metrics: The IO rating does not consider how well a player performed in terms of mechanics, such as using their class toolkit effectively, executing interrupts, managing crowd control, or contributing to the team’s overall strategy.
No Measurement of Consistency: It doesn’t reflect the consistency of a player’s performance. For example, a player who rarely completes high-level keys but has a few successful runs could have a similar IO rating to a player who consistently performs well in those keys.
Example(s)
Skill Difference Not Reflected: A player who attempts 20 keys and successfully times only 1 might have a similar IO score to another player who times 5 out of 10 keys. This situation illustrates that quantity can overshadow quality in the current system, not truly reflecting the skill difference between these two players.
High Key-Level Fluctuations: The IO system doesn’t differentiate between a player who barely manages to complete these keys and one who does so with relative ease and consistency.
3. Lack of Team Continuity
Summary
Problem
The system does not incentivize forming lasting teams or rosters.
Discussion
The system does not encourage forming lasting teams or rosters, leading to a ‘one-off’ mentality in group formation. This undermines the development of team synergy and long-term player relationships, as well as character progression.
Transient Group Dynamics: The current system often leads to one-time group formations where players come together for a single run and then disband.
Lack of Incentives for Consistent Teams: Players are not rewarded for staying with the same group or for building a team over time. The system does not recognize or reward the effort put into maintaining a consistent roster.
This leads to a ‘mercenary’ mindset, where players frequently jump between groups, seeking the most immediate and convenient opportunities for personal progression.
Difficulty in Team Formation: Forming a team that consistently plays together is challenging due to scheduling conflicts, varying levels of commitment, and the game’s design not facilitating such arrangements.
Players often resort to ad-hoc groupings, which lack the cohesion and understanding that come with regular team play.
4. High Time Investment vs. Limited Progression
Summary
Problem
Disproportionate time required for meaningful IO progression, especially at higher levels, needing 40-60+ hours per week for IO progression at high key levels. The “reward” stops at KSM for the average player.
Discussion
The time required to achieve meaningful progression, especially at higher levels, is disproportionately high compared to the rewards, making the experience unsustainable for many players.
This is partly due to the low success rate of completing high-level keys, especially when using the Looking for Group (LFG) tool or similar community resources.
At the high key levels (25+), the success rate for completing these dungeons within the time limit in pick-up groups is remarkably low, around 10%-30%. This low success rate is attributed to various factors, including the lack of coordination and synergy in PUGs, variable player skill levels, and the increased difficulty of the dungeons themselves.
Example(s)
Player Experience with High-Level Keys
Players attempting to complete keys at this level often find themselves in a cycle of joining groups, attempting the dungeon, and failing, leading to the depletion of the key. This cycle is repeated multiple times, consuming significant amounts of time with little to no progression in terms of IO score or player character development.
Given the low success rates of such high-level keys (around 10%-30% in pick-up groups), a player might need to invest approximately 10 hours for a single successful run. To make meaningful IO progression, considering the minimal IO points gained per successful run, a player might have to dedicate upwards of 80 hours per week.
Even with a 50% success rate, a substantial time investment (over 40 hours a week) is required.
This level of time commitment is unsustainable for most players and highlights a significant imbalance in the game’s progression system.
Comparison with Lower-Level Keys
The stark contrast in success rates between lower-level keys and those at the 25+ level showcases the increasing difficulty and coordination required. Players may find lower-level keys more manageable with PUGs, but the leap to high-level keys presents a substantial barrier, largely due to the reliance on random group formations.
This is well documented by popular streamers, solo-gamers, and youtubers that make content regarding the state of WoW Mythic Plus.
5. Behavioral Issues
Summary
Problem
Absence of a behavior rating system leading to increased toxicity, and huge waste of time.
Discussion
I am sure almost everyone knows what goes in this section.
Example(s)
Conflicts During Dungeon Runs
Common scenarios include disputes between players over strategy, blame for mistakes, having a bad day, whatever it may be. The lack of accountability for behavior can lead to an environment where players feel free to express frustration or anger unconstructively.
Running one’s own keys adds the challenge of managing team dynamics and conflict resolution.
There’s always some instance of a tank/healer/dps fighting about something against one another, instead of completing the key. Why? Nothing you say or do will change someone’s mind during the run. It only makes things worse.
I get tanks/healers/dps who a) threaten to leave because x stood in y, or x didn’t kick y. That’s fine, but it’s really sick when they straight ALT F4, after dying in a mechanic.
6. Role and Class Bias
Summary
Yes, this is a problem but its last for a reason. I believe if the issues above are addressed, this wouldn’t be such the problem it is now.
Problem
A distinct preference for certain roles (AUG/Tank/Healer) and classes, particularly purple ones, leading to exclusion and limited opportunities.
Discussion
Statistics don’t lie (subcreation, raider io, wow leaderboard), and once you account for the THREE required roles (AUG/Tank/Healer), there are only TWO open spots for DPS.
As the time of writing this, if you are not PURPLE (DH/Demo) then the chances of getting into a high-level key is slim to none.
I am NOT advocating for all classes and all specs to be viable – just pointing out what happens when the game design does not provide matchmaking for its players.
Example(s)
A rogue (my class) is considered “A” tier, yet given the chance, a DH/Demo lock will be taken over one. Unless required for a specific niche shroud-skip (which warlocks can do now instead using Gate), there’s no reason to bring one. This situation can be particularly frustrating for skilled players whose classes are currently perceived as less desirable, as it limits their opportunities to participate in and enjoy high-end content.
The bias towards certain classes can lead to a less diverse and flexible group composition. This not only limits the variety of gameplay experiences but can also reinforce the bias, as groups tend to stick with compositions they believe are most likely to succeed.
I have both a tank and healer; VDH, Resto Druid, and Rogue – it’s not the class design and bias that is the issue, it’s the inherit system around Mythic Plus.
Section: Proposed Solutions
I believe that it requires an overall addressing that would produce a domino effect on every single aspect above. A lot of the problems would start to disappear and make a smoother experience for all players, not just people pushing title.
1. Addressing Player Behavior, Skill, and Consistency
This should be the first step.
Behavior Score System
Summary
The current Mythic Plus system lacks a mechanism to monitor or manage player behavior. Implement a post-dungeon behavior rating system.
Without a behavior rating system, players who engage in toxic behavior face little to no immediate consequences, which can encourage such behavior to persist or escalate. Battleground and Dungeon Finder give a debuff, to allow people to cool down or do whatever they need to do before emotionally queuing again.
Introducing a post-dungeon rating system where players can rate their teammates’ behavior, similar to systems in other online games. This system would allow players to provide feedback on their group members’ conduct, positively or negatively impacting their behavior score.
For obvious reasons, all this input data is for BLIZZARD USE ONLY. Think of it as the current report system, but actual feedback. This data is then used to give an actual behavior score to your character, determined by BLIZZARD.
Consequences and Incentives Based on Behavior Scores
Implementing consequences for consistently low behavior scores, such as temporary bans or restrictions from certain content.Conversely, providing incentives for maintaining a high behavior score, like cosmetic rewards or priority in matchmaking, could encourage positive interactions.
Just having a SCORE would immediately allow people to filter out toxic people. Everyone’s score should start at average and allow the players interactions to decide if it goes up or down.
Proper MMR/ELO Rating for Mythic Plus
Summary
Role-Specific Scoring System
A more nuanced system is needed that factors in various aspects of gameplay, not just key completion. I am giving some very SIMPLE YET BRIEF examples, take it with a grain of salt.
Divided into roles FIVE roles:
- Aug
- Score based on their ability to enhance and support the team, such as effective use of buffs, debuffs, crowd control, and other utility skills.
- Tank
- Evaluated on their ability to manage aggro, minimize damage taken, and effectively use defensive cooldowns.
- Healer
- Scored on healing output, efficient mana usage, and timely use of healing, offensive, and defensive abilities.
- Melee DPS
- Assessed based on damage output, execution of role-specific mechanics (like interrupts and stuns), and ability to avoid avoidable damage.
- Ranged DPS
- Evaluated similarly to Melee DPS, with additional emphasis on positioning, kiting, and handling mechanics that are specific to ranged combat.
Evaluation Metrics
Each role would have specific metrics tailored to its unique responsibilities within a dungeon run.
Metrics could include:
Effective Use of Class Abilities: How well players utilize their class toolkit for their specific role.
Successful Interrupts and Crowd Control: For DPS and some Augs, interrupting crucial casts or effectively controlling mobs.
Damage Taken and Healed: For Tanks and Healers, managing damage intake and output efficiently.
Overall Contribution: Including factors like dealing with mechanics, contributing to team strategy, and adaptability in various situations.
Longitudinal Performance Tracking
Tracking a player’s performance over time to gauge their reliability and skill level more accurately. This would help in identifying consistently high-performing players versus those who may have had only sporadic successes.
Think of this as a CALIBRATION PERIOD for your role.
By addressing these aspects, the matchmaking and rating system in Mythic Plus can become a more accurate reflection of a player’s skill and contribution, leading to fairer and more satisfying gameplay experiences.
2. Addressing Grouping and Team Continuity
Once player behavior and skill are addressed, it lays the foundation for addressing grouping and team continuity. Several solutions can be implemented to encourage the formation of consistent teams and enhance the overall group dynamics. Since I am no expert in this space, I’ve laid out some ideas that could work below.
Roster Forming and Management
Summary
Roster System: Introduce a system where players can form official rosters or teams for Mythic Plus dungeons. These rosters would have their own identity within the game, like arena teams (way back in the day) but open to more than just 5, 10, 15, or even 20 players. I think a size of a Mythic raid roster would be nice.
Roster Benefits: Provide benefits for maintaining a roster, such as shared achievements, exclusive rewards, or literally anything special designed for team play.
Personal and Team Ratings
Summary
Individual Performance Tracking: Continue to track individual performance, but also factor in how a player’s performance impacts the team.
Team Rating System: Develop a team rating that reflects the collective performance of the roster in Mythic Plus dungeons. This rating could be influenced by the team’s consistency, success rate, and how well members work together.
Lock-In Period for Team Consistency
Summary
Team Lock-In Period: Implement a system where players commit to a roster for a certain period (e.g., a season or a month or a week or three days, literally any amount of time). During this time, their team rating would be exclusive to that roster. They are free to jump teams, but their team rating will reset.
Purpose: This would encourage players to work on building team synergy and strategies, fostering a more stable and committed group environment.
ELO Based Solo Queue System (Personal Favorite)
Summary
ELO-Based Solo Queue: Create a solo queue system where players are matched based on their individual ELO/MMR, considering both their skill level and behavioral score.
Balanced Team Formation: The system would aim to balance teams in terms of roles and player skill, giving solo players a fair and enjoyable grouping experience.
Transition to Roster: Provide an option for players who have a positive experience with others in solo queue to form a roster, encouraging continuity.
Incentivizing Team Formation and Continuity
Summary
Rewards for Team Play: Offer incentives for playing with the same team, such as bonus anything points, unique cosmetic items, or access to special things.
Team-Based Achievements and Leaderboards: Introduce achievements and leaderboards that are specific to teams, promoting a sense of competition and accomplishment among established rosters.
Flexibility and Accessibility: While fostering team continuity, it’s essential to maintain flexibility, allowing players to join or leave rosters without significant penalties, accommodating casual players or those with less predictable schedules.
MDI and 3rd party hosted tournaments shouldn’t be the only place people can compete. Allow your game to foster it.
Conclusion
Thank you all for taking the time to read/discuss. Please provide any feedback, as I am curious to know your thoughts/frustrations/likes/dislikes about the current M+ system.
