Rio, Curve etc. = Elitist?

[Gaidax]

Just to clarify - me calling 11/12M guy a noober or shit like that is nothing more than a tongue in cheek silly talk (I seen apparently it was not obvious enough for some not-so-sharp people around here). But on the other hand a person that has 12/12M vs a person that's barely 3/12M if that - it's just not the same level plain and simple.

[Kaver]

An implication is the same as saying it.

No it’s not. That’s just your interpretation of it. Stop trying to tell me what I imply. That’s not your decision. You’re very welcome to call me an elitist. Call me whatever you want. But you’re not the boss of what I enjoy and I never said I don’t enjoy playing with less progressed people.

[Volatilis]

Just to clarify - me calling 11/12M guy a noober or shit like that is nothing more than a tongue in cheek silly talk (I seen apparently it was not obvious enough for some not-so-sharp people around here). But on the other hand a person that has 12/12M vs a person that's barely 3/12M if that - it's just not the same level plain and simple.

No you were talking like a 12 year old and making tired trump jokes. That doesnt require being "sharp" to interpret such genius.

[rhorle]

Over the years of playing this game I kept hearing about these "diamonds in rough" that are fully capable of X, but when push came to shove, I was just way too often disappointed. So yeah, I'm a bit skeptic about your notion.

And yet your example was to put ludicrous requirements on a +2. Requirements on entry to group content is not inherently bad. But there are definitely requirements and attitudes that make it a bad form of elitism. Just as your attitude that you automatically carry anyone that has lesser progression then you is a bad form of elitism. A simple fact of life can be elitist. Which is the entire reason why that word has an existing definition rather then something formed on Urban Dictionary or similar "modern" dictionary.

[Gaidax]

And yet your example was to put ludicrous requirements on a +2. Requirements on entry to group content is not inherently bad. But there are definitely requirements and attitudes that make it a bad form of elitism. Just as your attitude that you automatically carry anyone that has lesser progression then you is a bad form of elitism. A simple fact of life can be elitist. Which is the entire reason why that word has an existing definition rather then something formed on Urban Dictionary or similar "modern" dictionary.

Yeah no. I think you need to relax a bit, buddy. You and your friend Volatillis.

You seem to be a tad butthurt there over people having a bit different outlook on things. You are trying too hard to put words in peoples' mouths and then conjure a tale out of it - it's really obnoxious at this point.

[rhorle]

No it’s not. That’s completely crazy.

Yes it is. Because words have meanings and the fact that you had to qualify your early statement with "directly" indicates that you even understand that. Because there are direct and indirect ways of saying things. Indirect implies it with out saying it so you can back track if needed.

[JohnyCge]

Whole rant about wow elitism and players who consider themselves as one is just a pointless rant. Let me explain

This game hasn't had any measurable value of how "good" any given player is. Mythics, heroics and normals are team effort and at best give you just a glimpse of how good selected player at team play of selected team and doesn't always translate to some general value as at other team he can have much worse(or better) results, but since any diifuculty require a lot of effort from whole team, selected player contribution is either 1/20 or 1/5. Of course good player can give better contribution, but it still is neglected by dynamics of team or selected pull.

Without going much into math, proper team effort grants more profit that superb personal contribution.
Let's define required effort as 100% or as 1. Selected member contribution 1/20. Required value to complete encounter is 20. Let's say we have extremely exceptional player whose contribution is 1,5/20. Team effort 20,5/20 or 1,025. Let's say whole team contribute 1.05. Then team effort contribution is 21. Thing is that over course of let's say 20 wipes we have 1.025^20 versus 1.05,^20 which translates to 1.63 versus 2.65 which is 1.02 more than first. So with our shitty math we can get that a little better than required (5%) contribution per player is 100% better than ultra exceptional personal contribution. We can see that in ideal condition in team based game, team contribution ← exceptional personal.

But then we have shitty balance and self inflating scoring systems. Ideal contribution for selected encounter cannot be done or is significantly harder with some classes as part of meh fotm class design. This means that effort required for desirable 100% on fotm and underdog class is vastly different. This is why team that pirsuit competitive goal( we speak for top 10 or some monetary or reputation or any other profit) is required to pick most efficient class spec combo. If you reach 100 with 4 buttons over 3 with fotm, you are pushing 25% more effort than other one.

Rio is glorified gearscore version 1050. Thing is that while score is static and have a clear definition and "win" conditions, the player vision of what is good score isn't. Let's assume we have gauss curve as normal representation of score. So this means 50% of participants will have score X that is medium value. Less than 20% will have score better than X which is Y and less than 1%-0.5% will have Z that is better than Y. Thing is that value X is fully dependant of amount of participants. As participation gets lower we have value X gets lower too and whole curve flattens itself, with pushing out players from range ZY that was considered prestige. Since Rio has no ceiling value and increase possible distance of curve it also lengthen the curve pushing ppl of ZY range. You can see it now that "prestigious" 2,5k score is now pleb score as viewed by few remained echo chambers. Yet you still have to consider that score is = time x effort and doing even ultra pleb score of 1k is not worth the effort to even participate.


TLDR; People emulate real world way too much in online game. Thing is game social status becomes a black mirror reflection of real life one, where person may(I repeat may, not everybody will do), do crazy things just to feel superior to other. People desire position of power and control even in online worlds and that fine to an extend where it overlapse too much with fun or artistic value of the game, especially in escapism as wow. As for op you can do whatever you want as long as society allows it, and there is enough demand for such type of play, but better just have FUN playing game.

Kudos to one lady in official forum from whom i got genius response to question why you play Wow. Subscription is cheaper than booze. And I must add safer. Have fun and stay healthy in game and irl.

[rhorle]

You seem to be a tad butthurt there over people having a bit different outlook on things. You are trying too hard to put words in peoples' mouths and it's really obnoxious at this point.

Says the one calling a person names simply because they don't agree with you or accept your arrogance. Funny isn't that.

[Katchii]

Hi everyone. I hope you're all having a nice spring day.

I play WoW. I'm a 11/12 mythic raider and I have a 3k rio score.

I prefer to play with people who got approximately the same experience with current content as myself.

Therefore I use systems like Raider.io, Wowprogress, Warcraftlog etc. to see how much experience people have with current content to compare it to my own.

Do you think that makes me an elitist or do you think it's a fair preference?

Edit: Also, is being an elitist a bad thing?

It's both. It's a fair preference, but it's an elitist preference in the fact that you have a certain expectation for performance and execution from the people you group with. There's nothing wrong with that.

There's a difference in being an elitist, and being an elitist asshole.

[Gaidax]

Says the one calling a person names simply because they don't agree with you or accept your arrogance. Funny isn't that.

As I said - I have no issues calling apples - apples and in this case shitposters - shitposters.

[Kaver]

Yes it is. Because words have meanings and the fact that you had to qualify your early statement with "directly" indicates that you even understand that. Because there are direct and indirect ways of saying things. Indirect implies it with out saying it so you can back track if needed.

What something implies is your interpretation. I didn’t imply what you say I did.

[rhorle]

As I said - I have no issues calling apples - apples and in this case shitposters - shitposters.

And yet you used +2 with ridiculous requirements in order to call something an apple. Instead of a more reasonable example. So you have every issue with calling an apple an apple since you are denying elitism when using a 100% elitist example. There might not be "diamonds in the rought" but that doesn't mean a 10/12 player is less capable of performing then a 11/12 player. Or that the OP at 11/12 should be excluded from content just because he is not 12/12.

You even clarified it that your comments of such were "tongue in check" which means that you even agree with me but are now enraged enough to label me a shit poster just because I am prolific.

- - - Updated - - -

What something implies is your interpretation. I didn’t imply what you say I did.

A word can have an implication even if someone doesn't interpret it that way. You did imply it you just didn't want to and those implications were backed up with several different posts.

[Kaver]

A word can have an implication even if someone doesn't interpret it that way. You did imply it you just didn't want to and those implications were backed up with several different posts.

Okay so I implied something by mistake. What I implied is not a representation of my opinion. It was a misunderstanding from my side and a mistake. But the important thing is what I actually mean and not what I implied by mistake. Are we good now?

[Gaidax]

And yet you used +2 with ridiculous requirements in order to call something an apple. Instead of a more reasonable example. So you have every issue with calling an apple an apple. There might not be "diamonds in the rought" but that doesn't mean a 10/12 player is less capable of performing then a 11/12 player. Or that the OP at 11/12 should be excluded from content just because he is not 12/12.

You even clarified it that your comments of such were "tongue in check" which means that you even agree with me but are now enraged enough to label me a shit poster just because I am prolific.

I label you for what you are. You literally barge in, latch onto half a sentence torn out of context and conjure completely outlandish story out of it and you want to be taken seriously?

Really now? How about you stop projecting what's in your head on everyone else? That would sure help.

Your elitist crap literally has no place here simply because nobody posting here is anywhere near "elite". With that out of the way - it's completely fine to set whatever requirements you want, especially considering this is a group content and you will play with like-minded individuals. If a person wants to play with people of specific skillset and progress and does not accept lower than that - that's not elitist, that's preference.

End of story.

[Saltysquidoon]

That's pretty much the heart of elitism by definition.

As an example, I used to raid top 30-50 US years ago. However, I currently have about a 2.6k rio score and am only 10/12 mythic (should be 11/12 tomorrow). Did I suddenly become less skilled and can't handle the content to the level equivalent of a 3.4k rio or 12/12 mythic raider? Nope, it's just a choice based upon my time constraints nowadays, so I can dedicate probably 1/10 of the time I used to towards the higher end of content. Most of the difficulty in the highest end content is having the time to do so, and finding 4/19 (more like 24-29 for a bench) other people that have the same goal and time available. However, in the eyes of an elitist, I'm probably a scrub despite my ability to likely be just as good as them.

This cuts both ways though.
If I resubbed tomorrow I shouldn't just be able to link my bleeding-edge archimonde/Antorus or whatever achievement and expect to just swan into a +20 PUG with my BoD geared character.
The nature of m+ pugs is just too temporary to expect the group leader to read your entire raid history, if you think about it on effort v return they're better off going with the "safe" RIO bet then look through your raid parses for 15 minutes.

However, in a more long term situation (like a guild app or an m+ group) having a hugely successful raiding history behind you is going to give you a monumental leg up over a completely new player or someone looking to hop into highend play for the first time.

[Declaron]

I would say it’s fairly simple, if your 11/12 mythic your pretty hardcore, and to be at that level your clearly good at the game, to a level that is far, far superior to the vast majority of the player base. If you enjoy what your doing and your relaxed and accepting to others who play the game In a different way to you your not elitist, if you think that anyone else who plays the game is worse at the game than you then your an elitist.

[rhorle]

I label you for what you are. You literally barge in, latch onto half a sentence torn out of context and conjure completely outlandish story out of it and you want to be taken seriously?

And yet I gave a simply response that was questioned and the discussion went from there. I no more barged in then you did. I didn't latch onto half a setence and tear it out of context. I responded to the stuff given and used the context of what they were given in response to. Funny though how you can't do anything but attack a poster yet can't see the real person projecting what is in their head on others.

If people posting here are no where near "elite" then why do you think applying a 480+ item level to a +2 isn't elite and that anyone who groups with you is carried by you automatically because of your presence? You are so caught up in your ego that you can't even admit that you are show casing the very definition of elitism and the worst form of it at that.

Of course wanting to play with a specific skill set is elitist. It isn't a bad form of it though until you start tacking on the crap like your "+2" example. Which is why this evolved from a player saying that they want to play with 11/12 players because anyone else won't be able to do large Mythic+ pulls or speed run raids. That a lesser progressed player won't only be carried.

An opinion that you called tongue in check and yet now are saying it isn't elitism at all. Preferences can be elitist.

[Gaidax]

then why do you think applying a 480+ item level to a +2 isn't elite and that anyone who groups with you is carried by you automatically because of your presence?

That's your problem right there - totally out of context bullshit you conjured from half a sentence.

[Scottyjscizzle]

Those aren't mutually exclusive though. You can be an elitist asshole for said preference. Also being an elitist isn't intrinsically bad thing, but many come off as try-hard snobs who treat others like trash.

I'm not saying you are any of these, as it's a fair preference of an elitist, any negative connotation comes with how you present yourself.

[Kaver]

because anyone else won't be able to do large Mythic+ pulls or speed run raids.

Again, I didn’t say this and if I implied it then it was not on purpose.

When I say that someone is better at something doesn’t mean I think that the others cannot do it at all. I don’t think in extremes like that. And I didn’t mean to imply anything like that.