This.
This thread is equivalent to “Solution to resumé experience discrimination in job interviews”.
And that’s why the smart people don’t just look at the shiny colored number, and instead look at the stats right below it. How many timed 10+, 15+? Highest run for the instance they’re applying it? When you see someone that’s at like 1500+ io and they’ve only got 8 timed 10+, it’s pretty clear that they got carried.
Anyone who is actually concerned with your IO score is less interested in your over all score and more interested in how many times you have time keys within that range. No one gives a damn if you have timed a +15 in SD, if that is your only time key in SD.
While that would be the ideal way to use the tool, sadly there are a lot who do in fact only look at the one easy-to-read number. It’s sorta what happens when anyone “creates” that kind of “score”
You really think people look that deep into io when forming groups? maybe a small outlier.
Anyone who is actually serious about checking your IO score, sure. After all that is the only way to really see what your experience is and ensure you are not just someone who bought a run. I mean the information is there, it would be pretty dumb to ignore it.
I mean you can configure the IO score to show you how many instances someone has run in various ranges. So you can easily see how many 10+ and 15+ keys they have timed at a glance.
the people you mention are outliers. Mostly for higher key levels.
Do you really think the bulk of users of anything (addon/app/tool) spend any amount of time “configuring” it? The entire software development industry would be turned upside down by that revelation.
Plenty of people are “serious” about checking your IO score to demand 1.3k IO for a +5. Since their groups are winning, they’re clearly doing it right.
So uh…apparently Blizzard hard disagrees that Rio is a bad thing:
About time they just baked it into the game.
I have no beef with IO. The only time I’ve encountered what I would describe as “IO discrimination” is in the rare instance I’ve seen groups posted that require an IO you can’t possibly achieve having timed all dungeons at the previous key level.
I don’t have exact numbers, but I think I was at 1180 or something with all 14s timed, and it would cheese me off to no end seeing groups for 15 keys with like “1200 or 1300” IO required. You can substitute any number you want, but if you’re asking for an IO folks with all timed keys of the previous level can’t achieve, you’re asking for a carry.
That´s exactly what happens this days, speccially for DPS. Except, maybe, for high end keys, like 18 and over. People will require KSM for 15, or even 14s. Ive saw folks requiring 1600 io for 16s, something you will only achive if you have timed all 17 and a few 18.
Yes, it looks like you are asking for a carry, but, if you consider that the key owner is almost the only loser if the key fails, it just natural that they are overpicky.
And we are back to the key depletion problem.
Yeah I’m pretty happy about this, just as long as they don’t make any funky changes like decaying score or something equally cancerous
The higher the key the higher the io score requirements people usually start wanting.
Just to get into a +20 key is at least a 1800+.
Usually what matters more is looking at how many timed keys people have done. All timed +18s will get you invites into +19s.
To be completely fair, they might think it’s a bad thing, but also think that it’s inevitable. Or they don’t have the ability/time to design anything better.
If they actually port more or less the same logic, including the flaws, ugh.
But setting that aside, I’m not sure why players would be happy about this. For people who like R-IO currently, chances are Blizzard will do an incomplete port (like just number score only), missing key features, and with a worse UI to boot. For people who don’t like R-IO, they’ll have a system that they opted not to use being shoved into the game.
The actual fix to this is to come up with a way to tell at a glance if a player is good or not. RIO is just a proxy for that, but it’s better than anything Blizz has come up with (achievements mainly).
It’s similar to the problem with raiding where logs give you, at best, an incomplete picture of how a person can do the job you assign them in a raid.
And how, pray tell, do you suggest they do that? This is trying to grade a player based on their experience in group combat. We know well that players can be carried in group content, so success in one type of group content is no guarantee of success in other types. There’s unfortunately no “magic” way to simply at-a-glance evaluate a player like that. Experience metrics like rio are about the best we’ve got, and they’re really just the game equivalent of the “employment” section of your resume.
No clue. RIO is as good as proving grounds was (or gearscore before), which is at the ‘not very’ level.
Except Rio represents your actual experience in that content. Sure, you can be carried, so it’s not ironclad proof (though that can often be sniffed out by looking further than just the rio score), but it still fundamentally exists as a metric for how high of content your character has done in M+. It’s far better than a random scenario that has little application to really anything.
‘Most experienced’ is not ‘best’, though, which was my only point. I don’t care at all about M+ or RIO and have no real interest in talking past anyone about this
I think a lot of players don’t care for the barrier to entry that is knowing how to install addons. I’ll never understand them, but so be it. The current quest system is worse than questhelper, the ilvl read out is more useless than gearscore was and this will be worse than Rio.
The fix I’d like to see to io scores, though, is that timing the key again rewards some small amount of score. Say key level/10. So 1.5 for every 15 past the first.