Best solution to the Mythic raid size problem?

[awbaker]

This is a server population issue disguised as a mythic size issue.

There are people who prefer the smaller group size but would raid in the bigger size raid if their server can handle it, but most just can't, and rerolling/transferring is just too much effort/money for a lot of people.

I actually want servers to still matter, so instead of making everything cross server I'd rather they just take things seriously and do a serious big round of server merges. We should have like 40-50 servers, down from the 120 we have now. Server activity is a huge deal, even with all the cross server things we have now.

Server population directly impacts server specific content. 100% agree. Really is a supply/demand issue. Also are there seriously 120 servers? Wow ha.

But yes, Blizz needs to address the server population parity.

[cFortyfive]

This example will continue the use of the Helya encounter.
4 puddles on 20-man, each measuring 10x10 (Yds). This equates to 40% of the floorspace.
2 puddles on 10-man, each measuring 20x20 (Yds). This equates to 40% of the floorspace.

Is this referring to the orbs ? Sounds to me as if putting 2 players together to avoid the cutter is vastly easier than 4 even if you would increase the size of the orb itself. I don't actually find your simple solution sufficient at all.

[Deleted]

20 man is the way to go. Period.

If low pop realms are struggling, link more of them together. If you really wanna mythic, move to a busier realm with your whole guild.

[Deleted]

The fact that this sort of thing hasn't been entirely balanced in previous iterations in no way, shape or form suggests that there is an inherent disparity between the two sizes that cannot be appropriately addressed by informed design.

As an example, and imagining an encounter that takes place place inside a room that is 100 x 100 (Yds), consider some of the mechanics you've mentioned as well as their difficulty relative to the group size.

Dispels:
4 on 20-man, or 20% of the group.
2 on 10-man, or 20% of the group.

Conclusion: It is very simple to achieve parity between 10/20-man, in this category.


"Composition":
2 Tanks, 4 Healers, 14 DPS on 20-man.
2 Tanks, 2 Healers, 6 DPS on 10-man.

Conclusion: There already isn't parity between 10/20-man, in this category, with an advantage going to 20-mans.


"Spacing":
This example will continue the use of the Helya encounter.

4 puddles on 20-man, each measuring 10x10 (Yds). This equates to 40% of the floorspace.
2 puddles on 10-man, each measuring 20x20 (Yds). This equates to 40% of the floorspace.

Conclusion: It would be simple to achieve parity between 10/20-man, in this category.


Anything else that is "impossible" to solve, logistically? I mean, I'm not a damn genius, but those solutions took me about 45 seconds to conceive of. So, feel free to come up with something difficult.

While the dispells can find parity, composition wise is completely different. 10 man has no room for changes at all, you will always have 2 heals, 2 tanks, 6 dps unless some boss needs 3 tanks. 20 man is completely different. Helya is not a good example for this but others can be. Elerethe -> 3 tanks strat, you dont want only 5 dps in the group because it will take much longer to down the boss, you are losing 1/6 of the dps instead of 1/14. That makes the boss quite harder (remember that this had to be balanced in BOTH ways, they cant be harder on 10 nor 20 man). Cenarius would be harder for 10 mans too, the 3 tank ignore dragons push boss strat shouldnt be possible at "normal" gear. Dragons of nightmare: completely impossible on 10 man. You need one healer on each side, one healer on the portals (which makes a minimum of 3) and dps outside on both sides AND inside the portals. What do you do in this situation, make it a 1 dragon fight? Completaly negates the boss. Impossible to 10 man in the same way. Then you return to Helya and remember it has tentacles that has to be soaked. Putting less tentacles only leads to people stacking inmunity classes to soak and push the boss on 10 man, instead of having a wide variety of players, that makes you in need of having almost a 20 man roster to have every class possible and some backups.

The space problem is not solved at all by doing the puddles wide, even if that puddles are 40x40. The really hard part on having 20 people is that you have more people to fuck up, if they are not stacked when all minions are killed suddenly there is shit on all over the area instead of just on one place. Puddles may be 20x20 on mythic and it should be the same because the main mechanic is to stack 20 people on the same space, not to have giant or small puddles. The orbs are a problem too, you cant really afford on 10 man to have 2 DPS and 1 healer running from the orbs since you are losing 1/3 DPS and half of your healers. If you make it a 2 orbs fight, the slicer suddenly is a mechanic that does almost nothing.

It is impossible to do a balance between 10 and 20 man on most bosses and it will always be, making Mythic a mandatory 20 man mode gives some space for devs to work on more interesting and challenging fights (I am enjoying Helya more than every other boss ever, only M Archi is near) instead of breaking their heads about balancing two different play and raid styles.

[taaveti]

The only reason why keeping a fixed 20 people raid size was necessary is that, there are not realistic way to keep the difficulty perfectly constant with more than one raid size, considering the different combinations of raid compositions.

Here is where the key lies: Is it really necessary to keep the raid difficulty perfectly constant throughout the entire patch?

In my opinion, as far as the first kills are concerned, yes, raid difficulty needs to remain constant.
However, once the world first race has been over for a certain period of time, I don't see the need for this to remain absolutely true.
And thus, my vote is on a slightly flexible raid size (18-22), as I see it as the best solution to a lot of guilds, provided that the following conditions are met:

1. The flexible raid size is only introduced a month after the said mythic difficulty raid is released (so as not to interfere with the world firsts race);
2. The difficulty of the raid needs to stay the easiest with 20 people when compared to other raid sizes.
For example,
when below a raid size of 20: Enemies health and damages decrease, quantified buffs always decrease by 1+, debuffs and adds stay the same;
when above a raid size of 20: Enemies health and damages increase, quantified buffs stay the same, debuffs and adds always increase by 1+.

[Notdev]

Server population directly impacts server specific content. 100% agree. Really is a supply/demand issue. Also are there seriously 120 servers? Wow ha.

But yes, Blizz needs to address the server population parity.

In the NA/OC alone, 120 server groupings. Should have clarified. EU has another 127 and Asian servers have their own as well.

- - - Updated - - -

The only reason why keeping a fixed 20 people raid size was necessary is that, there are not realistic way to keep the difficulty perfectly constant with more than one raid size, considering the different combinations of raid compositions.

Here is where the key lies: Is it really necessary to keep the raid difficulty perfectly constant throughout the entire patch?

In my opinion, as far as the first kills are concerned, yes, raid difficulty needs to remain constant.
However, once the world first race has been over for a certain period of time, I don't see the need for this to remain absolutely true.
And thus, my vote is on a slightly flexible raid size (18-22), as I see it as the best solution to a lot of guilds, provided that the following conditions are met:

1. The flexible raid size is only introduced a month after the said mythic difficulty raid is released (so as not to interfere with the world firsts race);
2. The difficulty of the raid needs to stay the easiest with 20 people when compared to other raid sizes.
For example,
when below a raid size of 20: Enemies health and damages decrease, quantified buffs always decrease by 1+, debuffs and adds stay the same;
when above a raid size of 20: Enemies health and damages increase, quantified buffs stay the same, debuffs and adds always increase by 1+.

I just don't think raid developers like to be bogged down by worrying if the mechanics/abilities they come up with will work and be fairly equally challenging at 10 players all the way up to 30 player.

A lot of mechanics in 20 man mythic throughout WoD and so far in Legion just wouldn't be able to be easily be dialed up and down from 10 to 30 player raid size while retaining a similar amount of difficulty.

Honestly think that was the biggest reason for the single size change and how it is unlikely that they will go away from it - the raid devs feel like it restricted their freedom when trying to create difficult mythic encounters. It is also why I think the WoTLK raid system was the best - there was a 10 man hard difficulty, but it wasn't meant to be the same difficulty as 25 man. If a mechanic that they came up with for 25 man didn't make sense for a 10 man difficulty, they just didn't put it in.

[Wrecktangle]

Lets say M helya for example, it has 4 dispells that can be cheesed by having an SP, but mostly you need 4 dispells so 4 healers are mandatory. If that was on 10 man, you would have only 2 dispells -> easier to manage -> less room with shit -> easier boss. Take adds on p2, instead of 20 adds you have only 10 -> easier to manage -> less shit on the floor -> easier boss. Lets say M Xavius ¿4 sets of dreams with 5 on everyone? Nah just make it 2 set of 5 to make it even easier. Lets talk Cenarius ¿The room is full on roots? NP! You have only 2-3 ranged so nothing to worry about. And we can keep talking until ages come to an end and you will see almost every boss is fucking easier with less than 20 people because mostly problems comes when you cant have enough shit on the room and you actually have it, or you have to do several mechanics organized between people wich obviously is easier the less people you have. Flex Mythic? Ha! that would lead to cheese mechanics just with raid size. Say Helya again: 20 people 4 DoTs, 15 to 19 only 3 DoTs. Just put 19 people on raid and suddenly You have the same Mythic Helya you have right now but one less dispell. We saw that on SoO with Sha (for example) when depending on the raid size you could have 2 guys on cage or 4, and people just sheesed forcing it to 2 cages with maximun people.

I say people is not prepared because they have strong bonds with their guildmates like they are their best friends forever. Most of the Mythic raiders have to change guild, faction and even server to raid, if you have a group of 16 guys that want to mythic and therre are 4 guilds recruiting, goddammit, have a brain, disband your guild and fill the spots on other guilds. If someone cant get on one of that guilds: too bad, you wouldnt be raiding Mythic with 16 people either. People want everything without sacrificing shit. In my own experience, we had a 7/7 M - 2/3 M Guild that kind of lacked people sometimes so we skipped 1 or 2 days of raiding every week which was leading to slowness on many boss kills. Solution? Guild disbanded, players spread on other guilds with similar progress, suddenly there was no problems on our server which had four 2/3M guilds that where dying because they had roster problems. Of course some people didnt get a spot, but it's the better solution for the server and for most people on the guild that are losing their time.

First things first I never once advocated for full flex (10-30). The fact that your response SPECIFICALLY caters to the idea of 10 man mythic proves to me that you put exactly 0 effort into reading or understanding what I was saying. I asked for examples of where encounter quality would be diluted by having a flex of 18-22.

Your second point literally tells a terrible story. You're literally advocating not playing with friends, not playing with people you know and like, transfer to a new server with a new guild that has no guarantee you'll like it, the progression will provide what you're looking for etc.

All the points I made are possible solutions to some of these issues. I never said that they are perfect or the best or optimal. I asked for discussion points/insight/examples as to what I could be missing or wrong about.

It's not about wanting anything without sacrificing shit. It's about is it possible to improve the structure so that less players have to sacrifice to participate?

And just because something is implemented in a way that doesn't suit all players doesn't mean it needs optimization or improvement. And also, when Wrecktangle says something isn't optimal that does not, in fact, mean that it is sub-optimal. Since you seem intelligent, you should be aware that your perspective is limited only to your experience.

With a playerbase of literally millions, and your above inference that small data sizes yield skewed results... how could you possibly think your singular view is capable of speaking on this issue with such arrogance and disdain?

2 quick points. I'm probably more experienced than most when it comes to this topic (having raided at top 20 US w/ numerous top 10 world parses on heroic content(now mythic)). I've raided at top 100 US 2 nights a week with excellent results as well, and I've raided heroic casually with friends.

Now with that said, please don't misunderstand. I am not advocating that I am right, or know more than anyone else. I am advocating for discussion. I want someone to tell me why the ideas posed are bad. Not that they are bad. I want someone to provide clear examples and solid insight into why my opinion is wrong.

So far no one has done that. I've had people assume my stance was 10-30 (which it's not). No one has given me clear examples of mechanics that wouldn't work with 18, that work with 20, etc. No one has given me a compelling reason why xserver mythic shouldn't exist. Now one has given me a solid reason as to why pugs should be limited in their ability to do mythic content.

Does that clarify my position a bit better?

I think I have been clear enough at this point that increasing total participation numbers by miniscule amounts in the four digit ranking bracket is nothing I am willing to lose quality for.

Again, you explicitly chose not to answer my specific questions. I gave you 3 specific examples and you didn't respond to a single one. So you claim that 25% more participation is minuscule? 70%? I would agree that 3% is certainly minuscule.

Your complete lack of analytical prowess and selfishness makes you quite possibly the worst candidate for a discussion.

I could say the same about you being someone not participating in somewhat relevant progression and as obvious later on have zero appreciation for decently tuned encounters. There is enough very accessible content to participate in - mythic+, lfr, normal and heroic so please do tell me what's so wrong about having one left that's just about quality encounters?
I am not even in a high end guild but I still have no interest in players who couldn't be arsed to simply transfer.

I know you want to try and flex on me because I am not raiding mythic this tier and you are (this point is actually really important in establishing your character). It's 100% evident based on your desire to talk down to me, your complete disregard for other players and their experience, and as you said "not even in a good guild" that you're one of those elitist wannabe players. You think you're good so you think you're better than other people, but in actually you're probably pretty mediocre.

Now that is out of the way, I'm not hear talking about lfg or normal or heroic. I want challenging content that is more accessible to players like me. I then offered solutions that I felt would be reasonable and detailed why they are reasonable. You've completely and hilariously failed at every turn to refute my statements with actual evidence or insight as to why my solutions are bad. You say encounter quality will suffer too much without actually identifying a single instance of what a diluted encounter would entail.

I would presume that someone who was at some point raiding encounters near release would know. How do you handle adds when you have varying numbers of players ? Just adjust their hp and call it a day ? Space is also quite an important quantity in encounters - how does it change going from 18 to 22 ? How much more of an issue does horn of valor become with the highest amount of players ? Do you get more orb immune players on helya m with 18 vs 22 ?

Here we go again. You try flexing on me like you're some kind of badass player lol. Just stop.

How do you handle adds when you have 18 players vs 20? Easy. The same way you would do it if you had 20. There's no mechanic change here. HP scaling could handle this easily. The same applies for 22.

Space is mostly irrelevant. Are you implying in that massive arena that there isn't enough room to deal with horn of valor? with 2 extra people? It's almost like you're deliberately trying to lose this argument as badly as you possibly can.

18-22 is a small enough flex that I don't think it warrants any change to the # of orbs going out. 3/18 = ~17% of players and 3/22 is ~14% of the raid getting it. Not a large enough change to worry about one way or the other. I also don't think it inherently is more difficult to manage the space with 22 either when almost all of the mechanics require you to stack up anyway then spread out before stacking back up.

The 4 flex spots are almost guaranteed to be almost all DPS. You may pull an extra healer in for a specific fight, but that's no different than live where you'd sacrifice one of your 20 for an extra healer anyway if you needed it.

repeat after me - difficulty setting for organized guilds. You can ATTEMPT to do pug mythic raids all you want I don't see though why you would be entitled to any support beyond that and while you seem to believe that you not being able to make time for a guild is a noteworthy argument when in reality it simply isn't.

Condescending again? Are you capable of having a discussion without letting your emotions run rampant? You want to limit something so someone else can't do what you're doing. That's the only logical explanation for your aversion. You literally have said you don't want PUGs to be able to do the content you're doing, that they're not "entitled" to any support for it. That's hilarious. I want you to give me SPECIFIC clear examples as to why opening mythic cross realm is bad. I want you to give me clear specific examples as to why getting more players in raiding is bad. Don't tell me encounter quality will suffer or blah blah. I want you to tell me WHY it will suffer.

Didn't see much of a reason to entertain this particular bullshit. To what extend does player randolf12 only being able to make a raid once a week make any difference ?
Should I get on that level as well ? Hey there's randolf13 purely hypothetical hurr durr to proof a point durr he only has one arm, 10 children and a 150 hour work week let's make it possible for him to raid mythic and has a serious anxiety towards even numbers so 20 doesn't work for him.
Hey we actually kinda suck so could you just nerf the next raid for us ? I mean I certainly see a benefit there for everyone
A lot of people who might want to participate in mythic content have issues to fit it into your schedule. Now that you are willing to do everything it takes to make it more accessible to you is clear as day but that doesn't make it the better argument.

So to be clear here. You didn't want to entertain my examples? More like you're unable to refute them so you resort to impersonating a mentally challenged person? What are you 12 years old? If you can't stand on the merits of your statements, then you're much better off not contributing to the forums when your only response when challenged is to insult, condescend, and imitate handicapped people. Cool.

What makes my argument better is that I actually have one, and have successfully defended it repeatedly.

Shortsighted ? I guess the one perceiving only the solutions and arguments benefiting him the most as good must know best .

Lol now now, let's be real bud. You haven't actually given a single argument as to WHY my solutions are bad.

You haven't said once why small flex mythic (18-22) was bad. You said it WOULD be bad. Not why it would be bad. Please understand that these are very different statements and the former does not qualify as a valid rebuttal.

I'm 100% ok with being wrong. I just want someone to tell me WHY I am wrong with actual examples and insight.

20 man is the way to go. Period.

If low pop realms are struggling, link more of them together. If you really wanna mythic, move to a busier realm with your whole guild.

Or you could just open up mythic xrealm, and now no one has to transfer? Which one, as a player, is better for you? Having unlimited access to any guild recruiting (or a significantly larger playerbase if you're a guild) or having to uproot 10-19 individuals to a different realm when not everyone can move, or some people have other ties to a specific realm?

You tell me.

[Kirbypro]

part of mythic raiding is beating the recruitment boss.

For people who don't want to deal with that, there's flex heroic.

Stop complaining.

[Accendor]

Why are this answers mutually exclusive?
e.g.

3. Allow complete cross realm Mythic
and
5. Allow Mythic raid sizes to be completely flexible (e.g. 10-30)

?

[Fyersing]

Is this referring to the orbs ? Sounds to me as if putting 2 players together to avoid the cutter is vastly easier than 4 even if you would increase the size of the orb itself. I don't actually find your simple solution sufficient at all.

There is no functionally increased difficulty in 2 people having to stack on one side of the room versus 4 people having to stack on one side of the room; that is simply called administrative overheard. Which means that in terms of difficulty, 20-man players will feel no difference, with the exception of the raid leader who has to chastise/explain the fight to more people.

The same way checking items at a 7/11 is no different than checking items at Costco, despite an enormous disparity in their scope of business. The employees see no difference in their expected workload, the only people who notice a difference is the folks who have to order the stock and maintain the employee count (i.e. recruit, fill guild bank).

[Deleted]

/topic

There is no problem with the raid size.

[SpamHealzu]

Mythic is perfect the way it is the only people who complain are either:

1) Have no desire to put in effort to recruit
2) Have no desire to spend $$ transferring to find a guild

I would rather any day of the week having Blizzard develop more encounters that rival the difficulty of Helya... then worry about properly balancing 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, etc man versions, bc the fact of the matter is even dropping one or two people can drastically change encounters (ie for a 20 person encounter, 3 healers just might not be enough throughput but 4 is over kill, so all guilds drop to 18 man and 3 heal easily).

But people like to complain bc apparently the old adage "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" must be lost on all these people.

[Defaulty]

I'm capable of doing mythic content. No I don't want to transfer all my toons for doing mythic content because I'm already paying this subscription fee and Blizzard has proven it can do cross-server content without the need for transfering It's extortion and you're all fucking paying for it.

[nerf shaman]

part of mythic raiding is beating the recruitment boss.

For people who don't want to deal with that, there's flex heroic.

Stop complaining.

+1

Lots of casuals in here complaining that mythic raiding isn't just heroic+. A part of me hopes they revert heroic raiding back to set numbers just to blast these players back to reality. Making everything flex this and flex that just takes away from the difficulty, challenge, and prestige of high level raiding. It should take a little bit of dedication and sacrifice to beat the hardest content in the game. If it didn't the game would be extremely boring. You would think a "top US raider" would understand that after posting wall after wall of text in this thread

[Deleted]

To be fair drawing conclusions on such a small and heavily skewed dataset shows your complete lack of knowledge regarding data analysis.

254 people is in no way a reasonable representation of the player base, it's not even a fair representation of the mythic raiding player-base which is considerably smaller.

But he is discussing it with this small representation, so it is reasonable in this context. If you want to go outside of it, you should bring data from outside...

[God Save The King]

You've made a solution before you identified a problem, and now you're trying to ram the solution into your made up problem.

There is no mythic raid size "problem"


You may not like it, but that does not mean it is a problem

[SpamHealzu]

I'm capable of doing mythic content. No I don't want to transfer all my toons for doing mythic content because I'm already paying this subscription fee and Blizzard has proven it can do cross-server content without the need for transfering It's extortion and you're all fucking paying for it.

If you think paying $25 is extortion then nothing will get through your thick skull. Extortion is obtaining money through force or threats... blizz is not forcing you to transfer, and not threatening you with harm if you don't transfer. If you are too cheap to pay $25, go cancel your sub, nobody will miss you then again with an attitude like that no mythic guild would want to recruit you.

[Kuruption]

I'm capable of doing mythic content. No I don't want to transfer all my toons for doing mythic content because I'm already paying this subscription fee and Blizzard has proven it can do cross-server content without the need for transfering It's extortion and you're all fucking paying for it.

I'd rather pay $25 to play the game they way I want and be happy about it, than not paying $25 and be miserable.

[cFortyfive]

You think you're good so you think you're better than other people, but in actually you're probably pretty mediocre.

I am certainly better than most people when it comes to gaming simply because the average player doesn’t exactly set a high standard. 4 k mmr isn't great, world 150 isn't great, 90 percentile isn't great, lem isn't great - but sadly it’s more than enough to set you apart significantly.
You have easier to appease standards when it comes to encounter design while I having played at a certain level for quite some time have different ideas about it. Same goes for your potential recruits - again I and certainly no guild I know at that level can make much use of someone who can’t be arsed to make a simple transfer.

So you claim that 25% more participation is minuscule? 70%? I would agree that 3% is certainly minuscule.Your complete lack of analytical prowess and selfishness makes you quite possibly the worst candidate for a discussion.

I genuinely hope you aren’t serious. Pulling numbers out of your ass analytical? You really want to be perceived as a joke. Selfishness? Cringeworthy at best considering you are perfectly fine diluting the experience of others to meet your ends.
I answered your question once again but you didn't like the answer. I really can't do much more than telling you that I think it's perfectly fine to leave one game mode where no compromises are being made to increase participation - especially not laughable changes that would have to come to increase it by 70%. I am aware you are dishonest as fuck but even you I presume wouldn't claim such numbers could come together from just a few minor tweaks.

this point is actually really important in establishing your character

Says the guy constantly stating how his opinions are better, others are just wrong, his group's benefit is the only one that counts - again thanks for the slight amusement.

How do you handle adds when you have 18 players vs 20? Easy. The same way you would do it if you had 20. There's no mechanic change here. HP scaling could handle this easily. The same applies for 22.
Space is mostly irrelevant. Are you implying in that massive arena that there isn't enough room to deal with horn of valor? with 2 extra people? It's almost like you're deliberately trying to lose this argument as badly as you possibly can.
18-22 is a small enough flex that I don't think it warrants any change to the # of orbs going out. 3/18 = ~17% of players and 3/22 is ~14% of the raid getting it. Not a large enough change to worry about one way or the other. I also don't think it inherently is more difficult to manage the space with 22 either when almost all of the mechanics require you to stack up anyway then spread out before stacking back up.

Yes space makes a difference in the same manner as having a higher percentage of your raid move for orbs makes a difference. You are really making it quite easy. Same way it makes a difference to have less or more players move with adds, less or more people spreading out as you maybe know or not the good spots in the middle are highly sought after. Or how about guarm ? Wouldn't more people spreading out for licks be annoying? More targets to unload debuffs somewhat better? Isn't it vastly easier to catch axioms if you have four more players available and to deal with the adds ?
But yeah well nothing much to do if it’s all the same to you but please get that experience In a game mode like lfr/heroic/normal

Condescending again? Are you capable of having a discussion without letting your emotions run rampant?

Another gem by the guy bringing me such touching stories like the one of the former #1 dps who only has one day a week time to play probably to take care for his family who sadly all suffer from cancer. I give it another mildly amusing.

I want you to give me SPECIFIC clear examples as to why opening mythic cross realm is bad.

Since you only seem to operate in soap opera examples - what about the struggling guild on shitserver 185 who loses their best player because both an officer and the player in question had a bad day and someone made a snap decision there because how much less commitment is required when everything is available and can't get a replacement on the day and they are sitting there with their sad faces with 17 players? Please think about the childr... err yeah

You haven't said once why small flex mythic (18-22) was bad. You said it WOULD be bad. Not why it would be bad. Please understand that these are very different statements and the former does not qualify as a valid rebuttal.

I told you but once again you didn't accept any other opinion because your standards for balancing are lower than mine and you are perfectly fine with paying that price to get you in specific back into the content while I am not.

What makes my argument better is that I actually have one, and have successfully defended it repeatedly.

As hilarious as it gets - my 5 year old niece also always thinks she's right when she just has another opinion. But then again there are still people in churches so keep on believing that toning down encounter quality for slightly increased participation is definitely the better argument. I pointed you to issues when changing raid sizes but I already know that's nothing you are concerned about because you would just accept it - same way I am not concerned about you and your three and a half friends finding a mythic pug raid when they clearly belong in heroic. At least I am not in denial over the fact that I simply don't give a fuck for your group of one day a week players and don't have to pretend or actually lie to myself that bringing in more people is for any reason but your own benefit the best solution for you and your peers

There is no functionally increased difficulty in 2 people having to stack on one side of the room versus 4 people having to stack on one side of the room

Yeah right thanks for the laugh. Dodging a line on a mistake is exactly the same as dodging a triangle or quadrangle

[Fyersing]

Yeah right thanks for the laugh. Dodging a line on a mistake is exactly the same as dodging a triangle or quadrangle

1) I can't for the life of me figure out what this sentence aims to achieve.

2) It literally doesn't change what the player does, at all. It might seem like dodging four 10x10 puddles is more fast-paced or hectic, but dodging two 20x20 puddles requires the exact same amount of movement. To not realize that it's parity, well, nevermind... look who the hell I'm talking to. Mr. Flex.