Not thrilled with the so called dungeon finder

[Ziryus-pagle]

@Drinknblink-benediction

I wish i was smart.

At the end of the day most people are not smart.

Blizzard devs don’t realize they aren’t.

[Misanthra-old-blanchy]

I to be nice like to they think are idealists. for an ideal whose time has passed.

Now all I have is my time in CTA AV. for now 4 chars.

3 full 80 clears from 70. 1 of them actually was a leveled 65 to 80 in AV.

the 4th one I just ran out of gas and time. 78.5…I can close the 1.5 questing with rested now capped off.

all I will say is this stuff runs at all times of the day, maybe 5 minutes between matches. 3/4 days of heavily populated, auto-qeueue’d xp bearing content.

while there is a player base who does not like instanced qeueue setups 3/4 days of 40 on 40 AV says quite a few want and like this…

hell, for all I know many anti-rdf people are all up in the CTA AV weekends leveling alts too lol. you know, the instanced auto qeueue content supposedly bad for the game.

[Drinknblink-benediction]

Im not in denial about how smart i am lmfao.

They are

[Zaalg-ashkandi]

If I was more dumber than these forums wood make more scents.

[Miregrim-bloodsail-buccaneers]

@Drinknblink-benediction

Im not in denial about how smart i am

People often tell me how smart I am but they’re rather selective about it. They’re just referring to my mouth.

[Miregrim-bloodsail-buccaneers]

@Ziryus-pagle

At the end of the day most people are not smart.

Lots of people don’t realize that half the population is below average but that fact is very noticeable to the half that are above average.

[Aurumai-grobbulus]

@Christabel-mankrik

You should learn what the words you use actually mean.

Stop, friend, you’re embarrassing yourself. Maybe actually read your own link.

Also, see:

---

@Aurumai-grobbulus

@Crucifixiän-mankrik

The fallacy implicitly alleges that the critic does not appreciate the values and customs of the criticized group or is traitorous

Dismissing anti-dungeon finder arguments implicitly as dishonest or malicious (see: traitorous) by suggesting it doesn’t negatively affect those people even though they say it does…

@Crucifixiän-mankrik

and thus suggests that the critic should avoid the question or topic entirely, typically by leaving the criticized group.

“If you don’t like it, don’t use it.” → “If you don’t like it, leave.”

Which part of this are you confused about?

---

[Deunan-atiesh]

Because clicking “request to join group” and having zero other communication is such depth of social interaction.
It’s the same as hitting the RDF button.

You cannot force socialization when people just don’t feel like it. Making systems to support it if desired is fine. The level of interaction I have between wrath with RDF and wrath as it is now is the same.
Click button
join group
Both RDF and current LFG support the same level of interaction if that level is zero or not is up to the player not the system.

I will say claiming that the other players in an RDF group “might as well be bots” is a personal view issue, not a RDF issue. Why is socialization considered thrown out the window based on how the group is formed? RDF or LFG I still drop a “hello!” and either get a response or don’t.

To those pushing “traitorous” fallacy, I’ll buy it when you bring it up against any other view point besides those in favor of RDF. Using it specifically to shut down arguments and be dismissive is just as disingenuous as claiming some people against RDF aren’t propped up entirely by a slippery slope fallacy.
We know where this path leads, it leads to RDF being used entirely for leveling and every piece of relevant content being done through the much more polished retail LFG tool, RDF is essentially DOA to most upon hitting max level. That’s the history of the game, that’s where we end up. Any claim of “community damage” has already been done sans RDF in classic by either blizzard or the community itself.

To promote a more (ugh) centrist point. We can all stop trying to blame or champion RDF as something that effected sub count. there is no appreciable, non anecdotal, evidence to support either claim. There was frankly WAY to many other variables at the end of Wrath and in Cata to assign anything specifically to RDF good or bad. The only thing either side can grasp at is that subs did not go down once it was implemented and even then that grasp is tenuous.

TLDR;
systems will not force socialization if a player does not wish to engage in that. The LFG already supports this method of grouping. click request join, get denied or invited.
RDF cannot be pinned down as a cause for increase or decrease in sub count.

Edit: lmao autocorrect changed “socialization” to “sterilization”

[Christabel-mankrik]

@Aurumai-grobbulus

Stop, friend, you’re embarrassing yourself. Maybe actually read your own link.

You’re suffering from the Dunning-Kruger effect so bad that it’s sucked you into a blackhole of denial from which there can be no input that would change your mind.

[Icytraps-sulfuras]

If by interaction you mean people sitting in an unfinished group in complete silence playing “is he going to kick me for a higher GS” roulette and the only other communication is the lack of communication of why someone applied to a dungeon they’re locked to flying to said location for another person to leave for another group for a dungeon they actually wanted to do first so now you reque and repeat the entire cycle. The yeah much more interaction. You anti RDF people are delusional

[Dragonforcé-tichondrius]

If your guild pugs a few people for raids and they grab someone on your blacklist you just boot em…thats how blacklists work

[Fatalthought-pagle]

Leveling a new character from level 1 has made me realise that sometimes it’s just impossible to find a tank for these lower level dungeons …

[Jeynar-mannoroth]

@Dragonforcé-tichondrius

If your guild pugs a few people for raids and they grab someone on your blacklist you just boot em…thats how blacklists work

… what does this have to do with adding people to your friends list?

[Aurumai-grobbulus]

@Christabel-mankrik

there can be no input that would change your mind.

There certainly can be, but sorry, I’m probably not going to have my mind changed by you ironically not understanding that you just linked evidence that supports what I’m saying…