a little salty today arent we?
Proving people wrong and providing facts now means being salty?
Good to know.
Welcome to 2022 everyone. The age of not being allowed to present facts (from multiple sources that is), just because someone else doesn’t agree with them.
I mean, go ahead and remove them lol. I won’t complain…
This attempt at a “counter-argument” is silly because I’m completely unphased by such a change.
1 Like
So you just got all salty because people poured a bit of “community” into your PvP soup?
My take on dungeon finder is wrath will drop and if blizzard is seeing good subscription numbers they would probably maintain their ideas
If wrath ends up being a disappointment, blizzard may genuinely consider dungeon finder
wait they did a poll? Curses I didn’t get to vote because I didn’t know. oh well 
You are obfuscating what I said.
Never used the word “fake” in reference to polls, nor did I say that only pro-LFD people watch youtube or that I don’t trust Youtubers.
A WoWlogs poll is definitely less skewed than a content creator’s poll, but it still doesn’t represent the entire population. You have to consider who the people that goes on Warcraft logs and answer their polls are. Definitely not going to be the most casual of players.
Again, I’m not dismissing what the polls say, I’m taking them with a grain of salt, and so should you.
Blanket statements like “Community wants RDF” are poor statements.
3 Likes
This is how polls work. It is impossible to collect a 100% response rate.
Sure, there is a margin or error.
Perhaps, in reality, the answers would be 95% for LFD and 5% against LFD. The odds of that are actually higher than it being the opposite.
4 Likes
Because people are asking for changes to an aspect of the game based on another aspect of the game that have very little relation with one another.
I have no issues with people who wants to talk about the PvP queuing system if it is done in good faith.
So we agree that polls should be taken with a grain of salt.
2 Likes
Yes, a grain. Not a bucket.
Throw in 10% margin of error if you want.
Pro LFD still ends up 50-60%
Anti LFG still ends up 20-30%.
You’re welcome to conduct your own poll, but you won’t. Even if you had the means, you won’t for the same reason Blizzard doesn’t - it will again say that the majority in support of LFD at launch.
2 Likes
I kind of did in that other thread by asking those questions.
Yes or No polls can only say so much, I prefer open ended questions that leave room for grey areas.
2 Likes
You’re conducting your open ended poll with a fraction of a sample of wowlogs or willi poll population.
100? 200? Fine, 2,000 people use forums. Your thread got a few hundred replies with every person having 1-4 replies, some are even higher.
Well, you said I wouldn’t, not that I would have the reach.
Besides, you seem to have a very binary way of seeing this whole topic and you fight me like I was against the LFD just because I don’t see polls as a conclusive proof for a statement of fact.
My stance on the LFD isn’t black and white.
I don’t think this really makes sense. I mean, Blizzard has taken steps to PREVENT people from playing together, because “pre-mades have an advantage over non pre-mades”.
So the system is different because they need a random selection of people to make the fights less coordinated.
I would guess an equivalent queuing system for dungeons could be put together, but to achieve the same level of non-coordination chaos, there is no guarantee you get 1 tank, 1 healer, and 3 dps.
Would you be ok with a queue for bg then you have let’s say 15 minutes to get to said battle ground? That would be like a call to arms being rang and either you answer it or don’t. This allows for the immersion of actually going to the bg and keeps the community feel of it.
Functionally the BG queue and LFD are the same idea and concept, anything else is semantics.
the ONLY difference in function is you have to use the battle master to queue, otherwise its the same system used for making groups.
there are a lot of human potatoes in this world
Arena literally wouldn’t function without access to the over-arching playerbase. The ELO rating system would collapse…
I play OCE, and even with the population of 3 OCE realms our ladder is basically dead. Pushing beyond 2k becomes extremely difficult, not because of the skill but because there are only 4-10 teams above that rating (depening on bracket) to farm rating off. Without new players coming into the pool, new rating doesnt become available to make its way up the ladder.
As for BGs, we are lucky to have 1-2 BGs going during the week and up to 6 BGs going on BG weekends… making it even harder to get battles going in the first place.
Adding these kind of restrictions literally kills PvP outside of balanced realms with a 10-15k population… so probably 1-2 realms.
huh??? ??? ?? ?
is this supposed to be relevant at all?
wotlk introduced pve queue in 3.3 at release of ICC. If its not out by ICC, start the complaints. But this isn’t even an equivocal thing.
1 Like
This thread is just toxic.
I have to suffer for my pve, so the pvp playerbase must suffer as well!
Newsflash, pvp participation is already abysmal.
It doesn’t need further help dying off.
4 Likes