Give me a legitimate reason to NOT have a LFD tool.

[PjPablo]

No one is claiming that. Please put your strawman away.

 

Then please explain your position. I looked at your posts and you are saying that content becomes easier due to cross-server queues. If I am misinterpreting you please correct me.

[darkcerb]

No one is claiming that. Please put your strawman away.

 

Terrible analogy. But, for argument sakes, let's use it. Let's say you add mcdonald's in to a town which can already barely support the fine dining establishment. What's going to happen to said fine dining establishment with the new competition, it will fail, and go under. Meanwhile, the Mcdonald's, which gets all the highway traffic exclusively, doesn't.

So, you end up with a Mcdonald's and no fine dining... hmmm, that worked out well. Yeah, that's a bad analogy too, but still better than the original.

 

So you agree more people should be able to run group content. Suppose the content is too hard for some people, should they not be allowed to run more content as well?

 

Plenty of people are claiming just that.

 

feel free to fill me in on your problem with the cross server tool.

 

Atm All I can see is "I don't like it"

[darkcerb]

I did not ask if the content is nerfed due to more people running it. I asked if the content is too hard for some people, should they not be allowed to run more content as well? In other words, should some people be excluded from content?

 

No.

 

And with a cross server tool they wont.

 

If your next argument is to jump up and down and say "Then we need to get them into raids! they'll need to be nerfed!"

 

Then I point out that this thread is about a cross server tool, a raid tool being an entirely different can of beans for another day.

[PjPablo]

I did not ask if the content is nerfed due to more people running it. I asked if the content is too hard for some people, should they not be allowed to run more content as well? In other words, should some people be excluded from content?

 

Accessing content and completing it are two completely different things. Cross-server queues allow people simply to access that content. Whether they complete it is up to them. I do think it is fair to expect that some won't be able to complete all difficulties of content due to any number of factors, but they should still be able to gain access in an expeditious manner and x-server queues allow for that.

 

EDIT: One way to control accessing differing levels is via gear levels, just like WOW did. (Just using as an example)

Edited February 15, 2012 by PjPablo

[Touchbass]

The only reason people would use the cross-server queues with all things being equal? Because it works. There is a reason why people don't tend to use the current LFG tool. Adoption is a great measure of success.

 

I never understood the whole campaign to educate people on the current tool and how to use it more effectively. Yes, it'll cause a slight increase in performance but nothing will change the fact that the tool doesn't work. It's like teaching abstinence is the best way to reduce teen pregancy when we know for a fact people are going to what to have sex and the best way to deal with it is to use solutions that work like condoms, open dialogue on matter and Plan B.

[Laylla]

Well he want an argument against LFG tool.

 

I honestly dont give a ****.

 

If its cross server than you can be sure ill start trolling 10 time more and ninja everything.

Welcome to life.

 

 

And this is where the community forums come into play. You would be amazed how fast someones less than desirable reputation moves about the internet. All it takes is one post, so dont give a ****.

 

Neither will we.

[Derekloffin]

Plenty of people are claiming just that.

 

feel free to fill me in on your problem with the cross server tool.

 

Atm All I can see is "I don't like it"

 

Why are you quoting me when you say this? Where in my post did I say current content would get nerfed? Hell, where did I even talk about the game in that statement (I was picking apart a terrible analogy).

[Blotter]

How the tool should work

 

Step 1) Set yourself as LFG for whatever you are LFG for (state class, role whatever).

 

Step 2) Look at list and choose members for your party. (they can be from your server or all servers)

 

Step 3) Run Flashpoint (or whatever)

 

What is so hard about a tool that does this? Why would anyone need it to be any easier than this? I mean really, if this is difficult in anyway you probably shouldn't be even using a computer.

 

That's what the current tool does other than cross server availability.

 

BTW, your cat dieeeeeeed....POSTER IS DEAD.

Edited February 15, 2012 by Blotter

[darkcerb]

Well he want an argument against LFG tool.

 

I honestly dont give a ****.

 

If its cross server than you can be sure ill start trolling 10 time more and ninja everything.

Welcome to life.

 

I love that the argument against the lfg system often falls to this when they run out of steam.

 

You'll become the problem you're insisting is rampant.

[Taroen]

Then please explain your position. I looked at your posts and you are saying that content becomes easier due to cross-server queues. If I am misinterpreting you please correct me.

 

You are misinterpreting... and I think it's a genuine miscommunication on my part.

 

The fact that more people are running content is not what leads to it being dumbed down. More people running content is a GOOD thing. It's the random aspect, and the cross-server aspect, that leads to the standard group being the lowest common denominator. There are several reasons why such a group would be inferior to a standard PUG. I guarantee you that a random group of greenies is not going to faceroll any of the HM flashpoints, if they even clear it at all. If you make that group the standard group for the game, then it leads us to the point where a significant majority of groups are failing the content, and it will get nerfed badly.

 

I support an array of options to improve people's ability to find and make groups for flashpoints and heroic 4s, but I completely oppose any cross-server or random aspects.

[darkcerb]

Why are you quoting me when you say this? Where in my post did I say current content would get nerfed? Hell, where did I even talk about the game in that statement (I was picking apart a terrible analogy).

Terrible analogy. But, for argument sakes, let's use it. Let's say you add mcdonald's in to a town which can already barely support the fine dining establishment. What's going to happen to said fine dining establishment with the new competition, it will fail, and go under. Meanwhile, the Mcdonald's, which gets all the highway traffic exclusively, doesn't.

So, you end up with a Mcdonald's and no fine dining... hmmm, that worked out well. Yeah, that's a bad analogy too, but still better than the original.

 

If that's not the point of this analogy then what is? in the context of what you were replying to.

Edited February 15, 2012 by darkcerb

[darkcerb]

You are misinterpreting... and I think it's a genuine miscommunication on my part.

 

The fact that more people are running content is not what leads to it being dumbed down. More people running content is a GOOD thing. It's the random aspect, and the cross-server aspect, that leads to the standard group being the lowest common denominator. There are several reasons why such a group would be inferior to a standard PUG. I guarantee you that a random group of greenies is not going to faceroll any of the HM flashpoints, if they even clear it at all. If you make that group the standard group for the game, then it leads us to the point where a significant majority of groups are failing the content, and it will get nerfed badly.

 

I support an array of options to improve people's ability to find and make groups for flashpoints and heroic 4s, but I completely oppose any cross-server or random aspects.

 

Then:

 

With more people seeing the content you fear that they will complain and it will be nerfed.

 

Again my answer is that all that changes is the volume of groups, what bioware does with that increased data is up to them and outside the scope of this argument

 

still apply's, in fact please explain how that doesn't address your point.

[Derekloffin]

Terrible analogy. But, for argument sakes, let's use it. Let's say you add mcdonald's in to a town which can already barely support the fine dining establishment. What's going to happen to said fine dining establishment with the new competition, it will fail, and go under. Meanwhile, the Mcdonald's, which gets all the highway traffic exclusively, doesn't.

So, you end up with a Mcdonald's and no fine dining... hmmm, that worked out well. Yeah, that's a bad analogy too, but still better than the original.

 

If that's not the point of this analogy then what is?

 

No, that's not the least point of that analogy as both the original and mine are not dealing with difficulty at all. We're dealing with the option of people selecting one way of grouping up vs another. His analogy claiming adding an option had no, or little impact. I used his same analogy to show it could actually destroy the other option. None of that dealt with content difficulty.

[Taroen]

Then:

 

With more people seeing the content you fear that they will complain and it will be nerfed.

 

Again my answer is that all that changes is the volume of groups, what bioware does with that increased data is up to them and outside the scope of this argument

 

still apply's, in fact please explain how that doesn't address your point.

 

This is exactly why I rarely reply to you.

 

You're not reading what I said, and instead you're replying to what you wanted to hear.

 

NOWHERE, not one SINGLE time, did I ever say the highlighted part. In fact. If you actually read what I wrote, it says the exact OPPOSITE.

[PjPablo]

You are misinterpreting... and I think it's a genuine miscommunication on my part.

 

The fact that more people are running content is not what leads to it being dumbed down. More people running content is a GOOD thing. It's the random aspect, and the cross-server aspect, that leads to the standard group being the lowest common denominator. There are several reasons why such a group would be inferior to a standard PUG. I guarantee you that a random group of greenies is not going to faceroll any of the HM flashpoints, if they even clear it at all. If you make that group the standard group for the game, then it leads us to the point where a significant majority of groups are failing the content, and it will get nerfed badly.

 

I support an array of options to improve people's ability to find and make groups for flashpoints and heroic 4s, but I completely oppose any cross-server or random aspects.

 

Thanks. I think that if you instituted gear level requirements before you could queue for HMs that would alleviate some of that concern. I agree that you would need a governor of sorts so that people sitting around with lower level gear aren't queuing for HMs and potentially negatively impacting other players game play. Could also institute, if technically possible, a requirement that you must complete on Normal first before queuing for HMs.

 

I do believe though in order to be effective it does need to be x-server. That way your potential pool is large and this way also helps those on lower pop servers. I wouldn't be opposed though to a selection criteria that allowed people to select single server only though. Though I don't think the queue would be as effective.

[Megadoomer]

I'm a new dad. My daughter was born about a month ago so naturally, my wife and I aren't on any sort of set schedule when it comes to our free time. At best I can grab an hour or so a night to play.

 

A LFD tool would allow me to run Flashpoints during my limited play time. I would much rather queue up, continue what I was doing and be guaranteed a group that night, instead of spending who knows how long standing in Fleet, screaming for a group that may never form.

 

As it stands right now, I can't do Flashpoints. It's just a waste of time to try to find a group when my time is so limited. It's a shame too as I'm really enjoying the game and would love to experience that content as well.

 

To those people who feel I don't "deserve" to see this content because I don't have the time to devote, go F' yourselves. I'm paying $15 bucks a month just like you.

 

Bioware spent/will spend thousands if not millions of $$ to develop this content and there should be a way for the vast majority of players to take part in it.

[darkcerb]

This is exactly why I rarely reply to you.

 

You're not reading what I said, and instead you're replying to what you wanted to hear.

 

NOWHERE, not one SINGLE time, did I ever say the highlighted part. In fact. If you actually read what I wrote, it says the exact OPPOSITE.

You are misinterpreting... and I think it's a genuine miscommunication on my part.

 

The fact that more people are running content is not what leads to it being dumbed down. More people running content is a GOOD thing. It's the random aspect, and the cross-server aspect, that leads to the standard group being the lowest common denominator. There are several reasons why such a group would be inferior to a standard PUG. I guarantee you that a random group of greenies is not going to faceroll any of the HM flashpoints, if they even clear it at all. If you make that group the standard group for the game, then it leads us to the point where a significant majority of groups are failing the content, and it will get nerfed badly.

 

I support an array of options to improve people's ability to find and make groups for flashpoints and heroic 4s, but I completely oppose any cross-server or random aspects.

 

Right there.

 

Your implication so far is that every group via the tool is thus.

Edited February 15, 2012 by darkcerb

[harpuax]

No.

 

 

You can stop right there. That is an actuall answer to a yes/no question.

 

Let me restate the question. Should some people be excluded from content?

 

Your answer was: No. Or Some people should NOT be excluded from content.

 

Some people should NOT be excluded, which means that some people SHOULD be excluded.

 

So people who can not find groups (for whatever reason) should not be excluded but people who cannot down a boss should be excluded. Correct? yes/no

[darkcerb]

You can stop right there. That is an actuall answer to a yes/no question.

 

Let me restate the question. Should some people be excluded from content?

 

Your answer was: No. Or Some people should NOT be excluded from content.

 

Some people should NOT be excluded, which means that some people SHOULD be excluded.

 

So people who can not find groups (for whatever reason) should not be excluded but people who cannot down a boss should be excluded. Correct? yes/no

 

And I need to obey your rules of debate until you can do your dramatic reveal?

 

How about you present your point in full first and then I'll answer it. Sound fair? doesn't matter that's my arbitrary rule of debate. And you have to obey it or not expect any kind of respectful response.

 

Your way of debating is fun, I should do it more often.

[Taroen]

Right there.

 

Read it again... Slowly.

 

I never said that more people seeing content leads to nerfs. Not once.

 

In fact, the part before you highlighted specifically states that more people running the content is a GOOD thing.

 

It's the random cross-server aspects that are bad.

[Laylla]

All I'm seeing here is a bunch of people making something complicated when it really shouldn't be.

 

I play WoW. Have played for about 6 years. I've never killed Illidan, never killed Arthas. never got to progress in Naxx. Not because I didn't want to, but because my job is demanding and I couldn't commit to a raid group. Also due to work, sitting around in Stormwind yelling for groups was getting me nowhere.

 

Getting gear was not an option for me.

 

Enter the LFG tool, and later on, the LFR tool. I just recently helped defeat Deathwing, something I would have never had the chance to do without this tool. My gear isn't top notch (yet! lol) but its MUCH better than before.

 

Now I'm here, and find I abandoned 2/3 of the heroics and have done ONE FP since I've started. My character, by the way, is 49.

 

It's frustrating to sit in an area, yelling out " LFG (insert mission here)" for hours and days and get nothing in return but dead air.

 

I can't speak for the other servers, but my server, which is supposed to be an RP server, is not as social as you would expect. It's like most of the place has gone into some gaming trance and the one "awake" person is left screaming out "LFG" to a void.

 

And this WITHOUT an LFG tool. Tell me, how could such a tool make it worse?

Edited February 15, 2012 by Laylla

[harpuax]

And I need to obey your rules of debate until you can do your dramatic reveal?

 

How about you present your point in full first and then I'll answer it. Sound fair? doesn't matter that's my arbitrary rule of debate. And you have to obey it or not expect any kind of respectful response.

 

Your way of debating is fun, I should do it more often.

 

I am not debating anything, I am just asking simple questions. It is your choice to answer them or not.

[darkcerb]

Read it again... Slowly.

 

I never said that more people seeing content leads to nerfs. Not once.

 

In fact, the part before you highlighted specifically states that more people running the content is a GOOD thing.

 

It's the random cross-server aspects that are bad.

 

Your point is that green groups(your words) will run instances.

 

Kinda vague, but my point is that already happens so the only change is the volume and then the rest of my post.

[Nicain]

I did not ask if the content is nerfed due to more people running it. I asked if the content is too hard for some people, should they not be allowed to run more content as well? In other words, should some people be excluded from content?

 

Its not unreasonable to assume some people won't be able to complete all tiers of raid content, that's why it's considered tiers. In EVERY mmo game, each player is placed on a path where they can reach and finish all the end game content, but not all players do, nor should they.

 

You are not be excluded from content access, your abilities are making it so you cannot complete said content. If 25% of the players can figure it out with no issue, 50% does do with significant issue, but 25% never completes it, that looks like a well designed raid boss honestly.

 

If you disagree then you either don't want challenge to your raids, or you're one of the people who never really made it to an MMO's endgame and just want to spoil the fun for the rest of us who want some sort of challenge. And the above stratification is a good way to determine if a raid event is scripted well.

 

Hell, I remember Plane of Time in Everquest, most all of the QQers here would have never downed Quarm, because you had to tier through the entire Plane of Time collecting gear to finish the content.

[Taroen]

All I'm seeing here is a bunch of people making something complicated when it really shouldn't be.

 

I play WoW. Have played for about 6 years. I've never killed Illidan, never killed Arthas. never got t progress in Naxx. Not because I didn't want to, but because my job is demanding and I couldn't commit to a raid group. Also due to work, sitting around in Stormwind yelling for groups was getting me nowhere.

 

Getting gear was not an option for me.

 

Enter the LFG tool, and later on, the LFR tool. I just recently helped defeat Deathwing, something I would have never had the chance to do without this tool. My gear isn't top not (yet! lol) but its MUCH better than before.

 

Now I'm here, and find I abandoned 2/3 of the heroics and have done ONE FP since I've started. My character, by the way, is 49.

 

It's frustrating to sit in an area, yelling out " LFG (insert mission here)" for hours and days and get nothing in return but dead air.

 

I can't speak for the other servers, but my server, which is supposed to be an RP server, is not as social as you would expect. It's like most of the place has gone into some gaming trance and the one "awake" person is left screaming out "LFG" to a void.

 

And this WITHOUT am LFG tool. Tell me, how could such a tool make it worse?

 

A tool IS needed, but there are a lot of ways to vastly improve the ability to get groups for people like you without going to the cross-server random extreme.