Rdf -- maybe retail has the answer

Since in the grand scheme of things mythic 0s are roughly the equivalent preraid starting point as heroics are in tbc and wotlkc, what if we had rdf for leveling content and then a fully functional crossrealm lfg tool (not automated) for heroics and could also be used for pvp. This way the player agency is still there, there’s still a chance to limit ur party to ur server etc. But then there’s better leveling and the option for low pop servers. This is also a system also widely accepted on retail service.

The more I think about it the more this already is in practice so it’s not theoretical and it really checks a large amount of boxes on both sides

1 Like

im tempted to agree but retail… :thinking:

I know right it’s hard to imagine myself ever saying we should put x retail system into classic, but really I think it’s a good idea.

1 Like

The only bad retail systems are borrowed power and AP grinds.

Retails systems like Mythic+ are actually very good.

we both know this playerbase
give them an inch…

2 Likes

I want to clarify that I am definitely anti rdf, very much a classic raiding Andy, but this is def a compromise I could get behind

pandas ! give us pandas blizzard and demon hunters!! aaaaaaaaahhhh

1 Like

Classic raiding Andy mean a raid logger? Why gatekeep people out of 5 man dungeons using the RDF then? How does it negatively impact you?

We all need to do heroics, it’s my experience as well. I also play multiple Alts, of varying gear levels, so I’m not a raid logger, despite having 18+ bt clears and 2 full swp clears with my guild. I’m not gatekeeping, I’m indicating a solution that wouldn’t detract from my personal experience because rdf any time before TOGC absolutely would.

The pro rdf gaslighting isn’t a good look for yall

Honestly, I think if they put the retail ‘pre-made finder’ in… a lot of people would be happy with it. It’s actually very sleek and works very well. I was surprised they used the LFG from TBCC. While that system is somewhat nice, pre-made finder beats it hands down.

1 Like

Yes, because it’s the player base that makes the game what it is, not the developers.

The fact is retail is a really good game in many ways, but some bad design elements really over shadow the entire product and make it unfun. Most of these design elements were not asked for by the community. They were put into the game, and the design team insisted they were fun.

LFD is a non issue. It was not the turning point of the game becoming bad or the community falling apart. It’s a narrative people frustrated with the game like to push to explain why something they once loved became bad. Sadly, it’s quite a delusional one as well.

1 Like

It’s an issue because I’m saying it’s an issue.

Gaslighting people willing to compromise from a position you are actively losing because rdf WILL NOT be in the game at launch is dumb on top of being gross.

2 Likes

Crossrealm is the worst part, though.

I would rather have same-realm RDF than this.

1 Like

See with this you could elect not to cross realm and if ur on a major server it wouldn’t impact you

Coming after our random BG queues now are we?

The auto port thing I think is silly, it’s a huge sticking point for people from an immersion RPG standpoint so I doubt you’ll get anywhere with that, but cross realm I think is a fine idea. Especially since like I said with player agency you can essentially only invite applicants from ur own server if you want

Generally tho this sort of concensus can be reached right? Bc I don’t want my play experience degraded, but I would love to see everyone’s needs met, especially leveling Alts and low pop or imbalanced faction issues

But you are going to ruin my community. How else will I have groups where I say “Hi” and ask who the tank is?

You can’t allow cross-realm anything it will make everyone anti-social ninjas! No accountability, no reputations, it will be anarchy! It will be the end of classic I tell you! the end!

This misses the point.

Cross-Realm is at the heart of why LFD was bad. Simply opting out of it is not the answer.

Removing it entirely and making a server-only version (preferably the Retail version, as you mentioned above), would be the best option.

Being able to randomly jump in and out of groups with people that aren’t even on your server impacts everyone whether they know it or not.

This doesn’t miss the point, the issue i and many others have is with player agency in creating a group.

If this misses the mark for you personally that’s understandable, unfortunately a realm only auto group would be terrible and I would dislike it very much, albeit better than a crossrealm auto group.

Realms are an arbitrary concept and imo there should be a single server with the entire games population shared correctly

Same realm RDF exists already, its called the LFG channel and its what we all generally use.
RDF does not remove this channel.
If you would like agency over your group comps then the LFG channel fits that.
If you’re the type of anti-social who cant fathom being polite to people on other servers then LFG is still there.
Making RDF same realm would be a mistake. It loses it’s functionality for being helpful by removing cross realm,
it puts players back in the same situation we have now of the low level player base drying up as the servers progress, which is normal for an MMO but can be managed with cross realm.
Even with cross realm wait times would go up as the game gets older but the pool would still be larger then that of a single server. More players in the pool to draw from, can assume wait times would be comparable if not lower then single realm.

Any proposed compromise that removes cross realm will not work in the long run and is just a veiled way to destroy the tool.
If enough of the people on here who say they prefer using the current method of the LFG channel hold true to their preference in the chance that RDF does become part of LK classic then the LFG tool will still be used.
Just like it was when RDf was introduced originally. If LFG dries up, which seems highly unlikely, then it shows that the debate on which method is preferred by the majority better then any poll. “path of least resistance” need not apply.