Solution for M+ leavers....

[erifwodahs]

This is my biggest argument. You can't learn to heal a +15 by constantly doing M0's or even M5's. You have to experience the content to have experience in the content, which is why I have issue with people who will only invite 210ilvl for normal CN or people who farm +15's to their +9. To me those are just people hoping for a carry and it does nothing to increase the pool of players good enough to do said content.

Do your own key. It's not like you are going to get same dungeon for 8 times, right?
I mean you are talking like joining someones group is the only thing possible in WoW.

Join a community
Join a group
Join a guild
Assemble your own pugs
Suggest people to do some more keys after successful run.

Current situation is very simple supply and demand situation. It's very easy to find people to play with if you actually want to do something instead of acting like you are entitled to pugs you wish to join. Also know as - people who actually do something instead of complaining.

[Tziva]

"Not going to happen in reality", so apparently I'm a liar for no apparent reason. It's one heck of a story to make up just for kicks, but believe what you want.

Man, you need to take a step back, you are taking this way too personal and getting way too upset.

You said you linked a DD achievement because someone asked for you to link something, fine, I'm not calling you a liar on that. I'm saying the situation where someone is evaluating who to invite to a key by choosing between a heroic dungeon achievement and an ancient feat of strength isn't something that happens. There is a lot of other criteria (that is actually relevant) people are looking at, but neither of those achievements are one of them. That doesn't mean no one has ever asked for an achievement link ever in the history of keys. Someone tossed you a bone on your lack of experience and asked for that in case you had something they found relevant. I'm sorry they laughed at you over an achievement you are probably rightly proud of, but that doesn't mean there are groups out there choosing between server first achievements and heroic dungeon completion achievements for invites, because there aren't. The overwhelming majority groups don't ask for achievements at all and will eat my hat if the situation of someone comparing a heroic dungeon to a realm first feat and then inviting the heroic dungeon person has ever happened. The reality is groups are looking at comp, and score, and ilvl, and they aren't going to give any shit about achievements that aren't relevant to the content they are doing, which neither of those examples are.

Your Death's Demise is an impressive feat and it might be something I'd look at if I was building a long term raiding team as someone who has very high potential, but it has absolutely zero relevance in keystones.

As far as mechanics being obvious or not, in lower keys many of these mechanics get off anyway and there is plenty of opportunity to learn, and a good player will learn and adapt quickly. I mean it took me one time seeing "Drain Fluids" in Necrotic Wake to understand it had priority kick/kill target. The same goes for any other ability that inconveniences the group in any way. An old achievement of that magnitude is also a sign that I've played enough to know what other classes can do or not do and how to interact with a group and change strategies based off what tank, healer, or dps I might have.

Yeah, Drain Fluids is obvious, in part because it's also one of only two casts in those pulls that even can be interrupted and you only have to be targeted by it once to know what it does. It's easy to point out the things are are intuitive and quick to be figured out, but that doesn't change the amount that not everything is that way. There are trash abilities that if they get off at all will wipe the party, and groups can't afford to have one get off even once even if that once is all it takes for someone to learn it. Being a good player does not automatically mean you can discern the kill order, interrupt order, etc, consistently and reliably and fast enough for it not to negatively impact a group. It doesn't mean you automatically know the standard route groups take, or the strategies they use on a particular fight.

If the argument you're trying to make is that experience isn't valuable enough that people should invite off of it, I'm going to disagree and I think pretty much anyone else who pugs keys a lot would also. Experience is literally everything.

There are enough mechanics that are screwed up even by people who have seen them a hundred times that an adaptive player is always better than one who has experience.

This isn't the argument for inviting an inexperienced person you think it is.

First, this is a false dichotomy, there are plenty of players who are both. Second, there's no way to discern who is an "adaptive player" when doing invites. People invite off of the data they have available to them which is name things like class, ilvl, experience level. Finally, the fact that even experienced players mess something up a lot is evidence to me that whatever that particular mechanic happens to be is either unintuitive or complex enough that I'm definitely not going to gamble with someone who doesn't even have a foundation of experience. "Experienced people mess up a lot, therefore invite unexperienced people" is not a compelling argument.

The issues you are bringing up are literally noob mistakes such as dps pulling mobs instead of the tank or having 0 situational awareness.

No, in fact I feel confident saying that not a single thing I've brought up boils down to DPS pulling mobs instead of tanks or having no situational awareness.

Also, I don't know what your criteria for a "noob" is but to me, that word refers to someone who is new and unfamiliar with the content. That would exactly describe someone who is first jumping into keystones who has no experience in them, and the kind of hypothetical people you're suggesting should be getting invited because they did something cool over a decade ago?

I have never been talking about doing high keys, that is a straw man you and others on this thread have constantly been bringing up in an attempt to prove me "wrong" even though that has never been the subject I've been talking about. You can keep pretending I'm arguing for inviting fresh 60's with old achievements to M15+'s or Mythic Nathria, but that has never been the case and you are wrong to make that argument.

I didn't make that argument, anywhere. I have no idea what key level you were talking about, and I literally phrased everything in my post to account for that.

You're just getting offended to get offended at this point, because you're reacting to things that weren't said or even implied.

I will say, thanks for agreeing that people need to get experience in the dungeon itself in order to obtain that experience. This is my biggest argument. You can't learn to heal a +15 by constantly doing M0's or even M5's.

No, but you can learn to heal a 14, which you learned to heal by healing a 13, which you learned by healing a 12, etc. This isn't some crazy unrealistic plan; this is literally how we all did it.

I'm not saying the climb is easy and fast -- it isn't, especially if you're dps -- but if you're doing it, then you will have actual criteria to show to support your appropriateness for that content besides a fourteen year old feat of strength. The problems arise when someone tries to skip ahead and jump into a key level that they don't have the appropriate experience for.

[Goatfish]

Man, you need to take a step back, you are taking this way too personal and getting way too upset.

If you are imagining that I am upset, you are wrong. Maybe you need to quit arguing with someone who isn't me and we can have a conversation, because the image you have in your mind is definitely inaccurate if you believe this.

You said you linked a DD achievement because someone asked for you to link something, fine, I'm not calling you a liar on that. I'm saying the situation where someone is evaluating who to invite to a key by choosing between a heroic dungeon achievement and an ancient feat of strength isn't something that happens. There is a lot of other criteria (that is actually relevant) people are looking at, but neither of those achievements are one of them. That doesn't mean no one has ever asked for an achievement link ever in the history of keys. Someone tossed you a bone on your lack of experience and asked for that in case you had something they found relevant. I'm sorry they laughed at you over an achievement you are probably rightly proud of, but that doesn't mean there are groups out there choosing between server first achievements and heroic dungeon completion achievements for invites, because there aren't. The overwhelming majority groups don't ask for achievements at all and will eat my hat if the situation of someone comparing a heroic dungeon to a realm first feat and then inviting the heroic dungeon person has ever happened. The reality is groups are looking at comp, and score, and ilvl, and they aren't going to give any shit about achievements that aren't relevant to the content they are doing, which neither of those examples are.

This is why I asked the question, if my choice of current achievements is old achievements that prove I can play the game itself, or new achievements that prove I am a warm body that can roll my face on the keys... Honestly this is getting out of hand because people on this forum have way too big of an issue with my actions on an event that obviously happens very rarely. I never said it was common, but I did say that it was ridiculous to get laughed at for. Apparently that makes me some sort of entitled and elitist child. Sure I could have linked nothing and moved on to find a different group, instead I linked that, got told it meant nothing, and then moved on and found a different group. Sue me for telling a story I guess.

There are trash abilities that if they get off at all will wipe the party, and groups can't afford to have one get off even once even if that once is all it takes for someone to learn it.

Name one. If nothing else, almost every spec has an interrupt, so the chance of being the one person who wipes a group by missing an interrupt is so low it's moot. Again, I've met plenty of people who stroll through keys without a single interrupt because other people just always handle it for them. I joined a pug for a few dungeons the other night where the bear tank we were running with was new and didn't even have skull bash bound for the first 2 dungeons and it was unnoticeable.

If the argument you're trying to make is that experience isn't valuable enough that people should invite off of it, I'm going to disagree and I think pretty much anyone else who pugs keys a lot would also. Experience is literally everything.

My argument is that purely inviting people that are overqualified is antithetical to creating a more qualified player base as a whole. I don't understand what is so hard to understand about this. As I said in my original post on this topic, the difference in ilvl is negligible if people know how to play. Someone can be 215 and pull numbers worse than someone at 185, I've seen it happen a lot. This is why I invite people who are within reasonable gear range and it often goes well, but inviting people purely off big ilvl or RIO numbers is just giving you a teddy bear to cling to in order to hopefully scare off bad players. Maybe it works more often than it doesn't, either way, it doesn't matter to me. You are the one taking it personally that I have issue with your lord and savior add-on.

First, this is a false dichotomy, there are plenty of players who are both. Second, there's no way to discern who is an "adaptive player" when doing invites. People invite off of the data they have available to them which is name things like class, ilvl, experience level. Finally, the fact that even experienced players mess something up a lot is evidence to me that whatever that particular mechanic happens to be is either unintuitive or complex enough that I'm definitely not going to gamble with someone who doesn't even have a foundation of experience. "Experienced people mess up a lot, therefore invite unexperienced people" is not a compelling argument.

You shouldn't use words to which you don't know the meaning. It's entirely possible that there are high RIO or ilvl players that are great, and low RIO or ilvl players that are garbage. I never once disputed this fact. This is why my posting on this topic included that I would rather have an add-on that uses aggregate data on performance rather than what we have. Avoidable damage meters for instance, if someone averages 400k damage taken to volcanic over 15 dungeons, then maybe we don't want to bring them into groups on volcanic weeks during important keys. If someone hasn't interrupted one spell over 20 dungeons, maybe we shouldn't rely on them for interrupts.

No, in fact I feel confident saying that not a single thing I've brought up boils down to DPS pulling mobs instead of tanks or having no situational awareness.

Also, I don't know what your criteria for a "noob" is but to me, that word refers to someone who is new and unfamiliar with the content. That would exactly describe someone who is first jumping into keystones who has no experience in them, and the kind of hypothetical people you're suggesting should be getting invited because they did something cool over a decade ago?

I would consider the word almost jokingly to people new to content, and in the case of what I referenced, people new to the game or group content period. I don't know where people like you get off on trying to imply that I feel entitled to anything. I told a story about how I got laughed at for a respectable achievement and immediately went on with my life and found a different group when denied. It wasn't the end of the world and it's the party leaders choice to invite me or not. Maybe you should stop feeling so entitled to judge others to be the monster you want to attack?

No, but you can learn to heal a 14, which you learned to heal by healing a 13, which you learned by healing a 12, etc. This isn't some crazy unrealistic plan; this is literally how we all did it.

Where have I ever said anything different? I honestly don't understand your problem. I've explicitly stated that I'm not talking about inviting fresh 60's to high keys or skipping content. What exactly is your problem and why are you attacking me? Is this a reading comprehension issue? Is English not your first language? I feel like there is some sort of communication barrier because we agree far more than we disagree and for some reason you are still trying to portray me as some sort of entitled prick who feels I should be guaranteed invites to whatever I want.

[Tziva]

If you interpret debating your points politely is "attacking" you or calling you an entitled prick, then I dont know how you can sincerely claim to not be getting upset. In any case, I will definitely take your advice and end the conversation with you since I don't think this can go anywhere if everything I say is taken as some kind of personal assault on your character. You're the only one that has made any personal attack here.

[Goatfish]

If you interpret debating your points politely is "attacking" you or calling you an entitled prick, then I dont know how you can sincerely claim to not be getting upset. In any case, I will definitely take your advice and end the conversation with you since I don't think this can go anywhere if everything I say is taken as some kind of personal assault on your character. You're the only one that has made any personal attack here.

If you consider calling me mad, making wild insinuations about my points, and claiming I am using false dichotomy as some sort of red herring tactic "politely debating my points", then yes, the best thing you can do is end the conversation and probably try not to do the same in any further conversations with others. There is plenty to attack about my opinions, but mostly you called me wrong, built up some fake argument you assigned to me, and then circled back to agree with my initial claims.

[Atharaxie]

Tviza is really willing to see the problem from the other side. You are lucky to find someone so understanding to argue around here.
I wouldn't show so much patience. (You are a bit mad and a bit entitled).

[Goatfish]

Tviza is really willing to see the problem from the other side. You are lucky to find someone so understanding to argue around here.
I wouldn't show so much patience. (You are a bit mad and a bit entitled).

Explain how they attempted to see anything from the other side? They entered the conversation saying that I was lying and being dismissive. They then doubled down on me being a liar and proceeded to slowly edge towards the argument I've been making for 3 pages, that people need to experience content in order to experience content. Let me break it down as easily as possible for you.

My points:
1: Returning players with extreme difficulty achievements will know the basic mechanics of the game better than the average player and adapt to new mechanics faster.
2: People need to experience content in order to have experience in the content.
3: RIO in my experience so far does a very poor job of dividing good from bad players except at the extreme top end of the curve.
4: The community being unreasonable is a problem, which I attribute to the selfish and instant gratification generation we live in.

Honestly I'm just confused at what there is even a "debate" over. From my view I just seem to be getting attacked for hating on RIO because many people here seem to like it. The achievement thing is moot, I just thought it was a funny happenstance but people on these forums used that as a lynch pin to attack me about my RIO comments. Every other argument people have attributed to me was never my argument, which you could tell by just reading my posts and not reading what others attributed to me. It's a reading comprehension issue.

For reference, the counter points I've seen across people:
1: You shouldn't ever have to give advice or help to other players. (I think this is ridiculous)
2: RIO isn't perfect but it's the best we have. (I think this is acceptable, but is a defeatist attitude)
3: Old achievements don't matter at all in current content. (I disagree for the same reason that work experience is a thing)
4: You need to learn the content before you go to the content. (This is a non sequitur)
5: Just go find a guild or a premade noob. (Fair enough I guess, good thing we aren't deep into a massive content drought, but I've been working on it since I came back.)
6: Inflating my argument from talking about someone with little current dungeon experience to someone who has no experience AT ALL, or inflating talking about low keys to talking about +25. (I mean this is just moving the goal posts to attempt to make my argument seem ridiculous, and is obviously malicious.)

As far as the old achievement thing, look at it as if you were recruiting for raiding. Applicant 1 has 3/10 mythic CN but no previous expansion experience. Applicant 2 is only 6/10 H-CN, but has history of clearing every raid on mythic for the past 5 expansions. I would personally look harder at applicant 2 even though they have no current mythic CN experience. I never said the old achievements mean you know current content, nor that they entitle you to anything.

[faunski]

Explain how they attempted to see anything from the other side? They entered the conversation saying that I was lying and being dismissive. They then doubled down on me being a liar and proceeded to slowly edge towards the argument I've been making for 3 pages, that people need to experience content in order to experience content. Let me break it down as easily as possible for you.

My points:
1: Returning players with extreme difficulty achievements will know the basic mechanics of the game better than the average player and adapt to new mechanics faster.
2: People need to experience content in order to have experience in the content.
3: RIO in my experience so far does a very poor job of dividing good from bad players except at the extreme top end of the curve.
4: The community being unreasonable is a problem, which I attribute to the selfish and instant gratification generation we live in.

Honestly I'm just confused at what there is even a "debate" over. From my view I just seem to be getting attacked for hating on RIO because many people here seem to like it. The achievement thing is moot, I just thought it was a funny happenstance but people on these forums used that as a lynch pin to attack me about my RIO comments. Every other argument people have attributed to me was never my argument, which you could tell by just reading my posts and not reading what others attributed to me. It's a reading comprehension issue.

For reference, the counter points I've seen across people:
1: You shouldn't ever have to give advice or help to other players. (I think this is ridiculous)
2: RIO isn't perfect but it's the best we have. (I think this is acceptable, but is a defeatist attitude)
3: Old achievements don't matter at all in current content. (I disagree for the same reason that work experience is a thing)
4: You need to learn the content before you go to the content. (This is a non sequitur)
5: Just go find a guild or a premade noob. (Fair enough I guess, good thing we aren't deep into a massive content drought, but I've been working on it since I came back.)
6: Inflating my argument from talking about someone with little current dungeon experience to someone who has no experience AT ALL, or inflating talking about low keys to talking about +25. (I mean this is just moving the goal posts to attempt to make my argument seem ridiculous, and is obviously malicious.)

As far as the old achievement thing, look at it as if you were recruiting for raiding. Applicant 1 has 3/10 mythic CN but no previous expansion experience. Applicant 2 is only 6/10 H-CN, but has history of clearing every raid on mythic for the past 5 expansions. I would personally look harder at applicant 2 even though they have no current mythic CN experience. I never said the old achievements mean you know current content, nor that they entitle you to anything.

What are you trying to prove here? The points don't matter when you have different thesis as the basis of the argument. Tviza is not trying to disprove your points here, he's just explaining calmly how your claim about achievement linking is not relevant as nobody uses heroic plaguefall or DD as the basis for inviting someone to the group. He's not calling you a liar, sure it happened, but it simply bears no relevance to anybody inviting people to the current form of M+.

So please reiterate your original point and I think people will be all ears. What are you trying to say? I don't think anybody thinks people who've been good at the game get worse and every officer recruiting for a raiding guild should look into past achievements and value them. Keep in mind this is the recruiting phase where the specific tactics/mechanics don't matter and they're looking for a player. However, delving into the dungeon with pugs it's highly likely people will prefer actual experience with said content. Sure, people who're quick to adapt will fare decent enough in lower keys, but the supply of players is so high there's literally no reason for the party leader to run the risk of inviting player with lesser experience in that content. No matter what kind of player he is.

[Goatfish]

What are you trying to prove here? The points don't matter when you have different thesis as the basis of the argument. Tviza is not trying to disprove your points here, he's just explaining calmly how your claim about achievement linking is not relevant as nobody uses heroic plaguefall or DD as the basis for inviting someone to the group. He's not calling you a liar, sure it happened, but it simply bears no relevance to anybody inviting people to the current form of M+.

So please reiterate your original point and I think people will be all ears. What are you trying to say? I don't think anybody thinks people who've been good at the game get worse and every officer recruiting for a raiding guild should look into past achievements and value them. Keep in mind this is the recruiting phase where the specific tactics/mechanics don't matter and they're looking for a player. However, delving into the dungeon with pugs it's highly likely people will prefer actual experience with said content. Sure, people who're quick to adapt will fare decent enough in lower keys, but the supply of players is so high there's literally no reason for the party leader to run the risk of inviting player with lesser experience in that content. No matter what kind of player he is.

His point was to not link anything and just find another group. I was calmly explaining how it IS relevant just in a different manner than what is normally thought of. I laid out my points and all counterpoints listed pretty clearly in the post you replied to, and in bold font no less. You can go back through the last 3 pages and check my work if you desire.

My very first post was just saying that ilvl and RIO does not guarantee that you will get someone worth a damn except in extreme cases. Case in point, just yesterday I invited a duo queue 215tank/217mage both with KSM for a +12 NW. The tank did not know routes and had issues getting threat, and the mage averaged about 1500-2k dps and stood in everything. Overall, I'm still sitting about 50/50 on people with RIO in the 900-1400 range that can perform, while my 212 mage main (750ish RIO now) doesn't seem to have any issues doing mechanics and avoiding damage while pumping good numbers. There is an old terminology for this "PEBCAK". On the other hand, I've also had people in the 300 RIO range perform wonderfully. Hence my point that what would be nice is something like RIO that uses aggregate data across iterations. The only argument I've heard against it is that 2 runs can vary wildly, but that is irrelevant because the point of using aggregate data is to smooth out those differences as the data pool increases. It's literally the best scientific data collection standard that we can use to find proper means and averages with which to judge. It's what Warcraft Logs uses to rank dps, healing, survivability, kill times, boss difficulty and so on. It's what Simcraft uses to understand your stat values and how to gear.

It comes with its own set of problems for sure, but it would without a doubt give a more reliable standard to properly measure a person's performance.

Honestly the biggest thing, is that I have never made any argument for requiring people to invite those with less experience other than that the only way to get those people that experience is by having them do the content. In other words, the people who complain about people not being experienced are not helping the situation if they are not taking the initiative to be a mentor. This also requires those without the experience to be willing and able to learn. If anyone is entitled, it's the people who expect everyone else to magically know everything they know, and if they don't, hoard their knowledge. These are the people who fail the "Sally-Anne" and "Marshmallow Experiment" tests.

[willtron]

how do these people even get to 2k rio without knowing that priests can't dispel curses?

I've said it before and I'll say it again, things like gearscore and r.io don't make the player base collectively better it's purely for gatekeeping.

Personally i don't care because when I do play im hyper casual but the whole prospect of it makes no sense to me.

[Twdft]

The only past fame I consider when choosing someone is proving grounds gold, which still shows up in the dungeon finder and is char specific. Not because it was hard to do (which it wasn't) but it tells you the player at some point in the past took the time to do a solo challenge on the char they are applying with.

[Relapses]

The only past fame I consider when choosing someone is proving grounds gold, which still shows up in the dungeon finder and is char specific. Not because it was hard to do (which it wasn't) but it tells you the player at some point in the past took the time to do a solo challenge on the char they are applying with.

I've always found it curious that an achievement from what is now 3 whole expansions in the past shows up on your dungeon finder queue.

[Tziva]

I've always found it curious that an achievement from what is now 3 whole expansions in the past shows up on your dungeon finder queue.

This is a sincere question because I don't think I did it again after doing all the achievements in Mists and genuinely don't know: are they not updating Proving Grounds' level for each expansion, like Brawler's Guild kind of thing? I assumed the achievement was something you could still get as current content, just never looked into it because, yknow, it was something I did in 2013.

(does Shadowlands have a new Brawler's Guild? Maybe I'm just making assumptions here about all of this)

If they're not, it definitely is still weird that it shows on every signup. I've played the same two characters since classic, but I think I'm an outlier and most people swap pretty regularly and might not have it because they're playing something different than they played back then.

[Twdft]

are they not updating Proving Grounds' level for each expansion, like Brawler's Guild kind of thing? I assumed the achievement was something you could still get as current content, just never looked into it because, yknow, it was something I did in 2013.

You can still go in there and do the achievements, it's scaled to your level. Probably easiest if you have some azerite armor on your toon, ilvl itself doesn't matter. Classes have changed quite a bit since MoP too so dps checks might be easier.

But still, you will have to interupt and CC some of the mobs. I think proving grounds gold says way more about skill then some old raid achievement 19 other people helped you get.

[Temp name]

An old achievement of that magnitude is also a sign that I've played enough to know what other classes can do or not do and how to interact with a group and change strategies based off what tank, healer, or dps I might have.

It's a sign that you knew that stuff *TWELVE YEARS* ago. Classes have gained a lot of utility, some have lost utility, and none of them play the same. What you did literally 6 expansions ago matters fuck all

[Alroxas]

think of it more like not engaging in battle, like in bgs if you aren't engaged in the fighting you are flagged as afk and that means the current fight thats happen you just cant engaged any mob to avoid the trigger

Which then either means the player does the bare minimum: Tag once every 15s but only then OR more degenerate gameplay aka let me go and pull all the mobs even the ones we don't need.

And when I say pull, I mean everything from purposely tagging a non-combat mob to just poor positioning so that a patrol just happens to aggro or a knockback /fear effect from the current pack sends the player right into another pack.

No system is going to be able to tell the difference.

- - - Updated - - -

If someone wants me to link an achievement to prove I am not bad

Achievements are crap. See fake achievement addon. R.io can be misleading because boosting services out there. You want a good metric? Show just how many dungeons you've done in time in XYZ brackets (i.e Under +10s, From +10 to +14s, +15s, From +16s to +19s, +20s, etc).

Over 20 in the current bracket you're looking (e.g. if looking for members in a +15 group, check for how many +15s done in time) for is likely a solid player without considerations of class utility. Folks going after KSM (or boosting to KSM) won't do more than +5 over the current number of dungeons (which is currently 8).

Anyone under 20s represents a risk but that's fine too if the number of dungeons completed in time for the bracket immediately below the one you're at also over 20s. That shows that at the minimum, the player has some degree of experience and has successfully timed dungeons at a lower level.

Is this system foolproof? No. It can however, minimize risk of a run going poorly.

But how do new (or returning) players get there? You have keys too so be the group leader. You can opt to use the metrics I laid out above or your own. But you're not being declined when you're the group leader. Now whether you get applicants... that's up to you.

- - - Updated - - -

A few potential solutions I could think of honestly.

1) Improve the matchmaking system and put a hidden SSR rating based on what you have completed, your ilvl, and how well you do comparatively to others of the same spec as you. Then when you enter the dungeon queue, it tries to put you in a similar skill level group and tells you, "Hey, this group can probably only manage a +7."

First there is no matchmaking system for M+. Just like there is no matchmaking system for Normal+ raids. These determinations are made by players because there are intangibles that an automated system can't do.

For instance, on a storming week, do you really want ALL melee? especially in dungeons of limited space (i.e. Sanguine Depths)? No you don't so you don't let an automated system matchmake groups. LFD/LFR only works in automation because the bar of difficulty is so low.

2) The carrot approach. Make the rewards for finishing a dungeon more valuable to the point people want to stay in them. It could be simple as a little extra Valor for completing a dungeon that you don't time.

Unlikely to work, because if the group can't even defeat the first boss of a dungeon (or first mini-boss of a dungeon) because of low DPS or fundamental failure of mechanics. It doesn't mater if the finishing will reward you with 10k valor if the group literally can't do finish it. Moreover, some players have lower tolerances of patience. A player may only have X hours to play per day and they want those hours to be as productive as possible.

3) The stick approach. Make an ever increasing timer for people who leave before a dungeon timer runs out that blocks them from entering dungeons. 1 hr, 2 hr, 4 hrs, 8 hrs, etc. doubling every time. If you leave 10 dungeons before the timer is up, you're essentially locked out of dungeons for 3 weeks. If you want to leave after the timer has expired but before the dungeon is finished, a simple 30 minute lockout should suffice.

Again such a BAD system because the players who want to leave, they'll just screw around to force someone else to leave. Or they will take a degenerate gameplay approach to make the experience even worse for the players who remain.

For instance, let's say there is this timer debuff and Bob wants to leave but doesn't want the debuff. So instead, Bob decides I'm going to screw with the group. Pull that extra pack over there causing a wipe. Accidentally stand in the front of the Death Speaker in DOS so that they get knocked off the platform (as a tank or a healer) leading to a wipe. Now you're in this group with Bob as well. How much of this crap are you willing to put up with instead of just leaving and remember if you leave first you get the debuff.

But isn't that trolling/griefing? Sure if you can prove that Bob intentionally did those things. It could also be that Bob is a lousy wow player and plays poorly.

- - - Updated - - -

Maybe I'm in the minority in thinking that the mechanics in these dungeons are pretty obvious

It's not just mechanics of the dungeon but also understanding and exploiting the affixes to provide the most benefit in time reduction.

Now we don't need to go into MDI (or the Great Push) level strategies (i.e. plaguebore snapping to kill trash and boss) but there are some like routing and kill counts at specific points to get Prideful leading into bosses.

Even raging affix can be turned into the player's favor by allowing adds that can flip to your side (i.e. Loyal Stoneborn) to be DPS down to trigger that affix then turning them to your side.

[thunderdragon2]

Which then either means the player does the bare minimum: Tag once every 15s but only then OR more degenerate gameplay aka let me go and pull all the mobs even the ones we don't need.

And when I say pull, I mean everything from purposely tagging a non-combat mob to just poor positioning so that a patrol just happens to aggro or a knockback /fear effect from the current pack sends the player right into another pack.

No system is going to be able to tell the difference.

i doubt any1 would actually do that as its a waste of their time and money, they would need to be EXTREAMLY sad to want to wait all of their own money on repairs and time just to screw over 4 individuals and if they are that sad they should be banned from play in anyway we have got to the point where blizzard need to step in and fix this mess

[Alroxas]

My points:
1: Returning players with extreme difficulty achievements will know the basic mechanics of the game better than the average player and adapt to new mechanics faster.
2: People need to experience content in order to have experience in the content.
3: RIO in my experience so far does a very poor job of dividing good from bad players except at the extreme top end of the curve.
4: The community being unreasonable is a problem, which I attribute to the selfish and instant gratification generation we live in.

1. Currently there is no system to distinguish a returning player from a new player let alone, a returning experienced player from a returning inexperienced player.
2. True but the issue at hand is you can get experience on your own time and not on "mine". It's very much like the real world where jobs want prior experience for the position they are offering. Essentially, we want experienced with the current system and if you don't have it, then you need to earn that experience first then join the rest of us.
2a. In accordance with having to earn the experience first, that's why many of us provide the tip: Make your own groups. This way you can get the experience and be in relative control of whom you want in your groups. Maybe you want to play mentor so you'll just invite the first 4 people that apply regardless of ilv, r.io score or achievements. For the rest of us, we like to use some sort of metric to help minimize risk of a poor or incomplete run.
3. That's more on how players use r.io than the system itself. As we've seen on the PTR, M+ score is coming in 9.1 and the same negative arguments against r.io will be shifted over to M+ score once we get to 9.1 and beyond.
4. Good luck in changing the community. I'm pretty sure they are set in their ways and are unlikely to change in any meaningful way.

For reference, the counter points I've seen across people:
1: You shouldn't ever have to give advice or help to other players. (I think this is ridiculous)
2: RIO isn't perfect but it's the best we have. (I think this is acceptable, but is a defeatist attitude)
3: Old achievements don't matter at all in current content. (I disagree for the same reason that work experience is a thing)
4: You need to learn the content before you go to the content. (This is a non sequitur)
5: Just go find a guild or a premade noob. (Fair enough I guess, good thing we aren't deep into a massive content drought, but I've been working on it since I came back.)
6: Inflating my argument from talking about someone with little current dungeon experience to someone who has no experience AT ALL, or inflating talking about low keys to talking about +25. (I mean this is just moving the goal posts to attempt to make my argument seem ridiculous, and is obviously malicious.)

1. Players don't have an obligation to be teachers/mentors. Sure it could be nice, but that's not their role. That's why we have a new guide system in WoW. You want teachers/mentors then start your search there.
3. Old achievements also don't matter in current because it's no longer current (and outdated). If you compare any raid encounter from Classic at the highest difficulty of Classic and compare it to say the mechanics of Mythic Denathrius, you can easily see how much more difficult current content is. In fact, there's an article write up somewhere a healer (I think) posted about how much WoW has evolved in fight mechanics to the point where DBM/BigWigs is absolutely necessary because of so many mechanics to keep track of.
4. It's not that you need to learn the content before you go do the content but rather learn the content on someone else's time instead of mine.
5. If you want supportive of players then your best avenue to find it is within a guild or a community of like-minded players. You're not likely going to find that in a PuG.

- - - Updated - - -

i doubt any1 would actually do that as its a waste of their time and money, they would need to be EXTREAMLY sad to want to wait all of their own money on repairs and time just to screw over 4 individuals and if they are that sad they should be banned from play in anyway we have got to the point where blizzard need to step in and fix this mess

Oh my poor child, google EU Venthyr Warrior from Draenor who purposely quits M+ dungeons after starting the key.

But honestly, the issue at hand isn't that the behavior stems from wanting to avoid the penalty by playing in such a way to force someone else to leave first to get the penalty.

Some would argue that it's a waste of their time to try to carry a group who has no ability to get through this dungeon at X level with the affixes. Like a group that got to a higher key on a fortified week only to discover they can't pass the muster the following week because Tyrannical demands so much more of them.

[thunderdragon2]

Oh my poor child, google EU Venthyr Warrior from Draenor who purposely quits M+ dungeons after starting the key.

But honestly, the issue at hand isn't that the behavior stems from wanting to avoid the penalty by playing in such a way to force someone else to leave first to get the penalty.

Some would argue that it's a waste of their time to try to carry a group who has no ability to get through this dungeon at X level with the affixes. Like a group that got to a higher key on a fortified week only to discover they can't pass the muster the following week because Tyrannical demands so much more of them.

i didn't google that, also if all ae in consensus that they cant proceed, the leader would have the ability to prompt and abandonment check, of which all member need to agree to if it passes the grp is instantly disbanded and no penalty is given.

and its possible that people feel that ppl may not want to "boost" other through a key but more times than not its the "boosted" person that whims and leaves as the key isn't going as smooth as they are use to, also "boosted" player are "normally" the worst ones in the grp

[erifwodahs]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, things like gearscore and r.io don't make the player base collectively better it's purely for gatekeeping.

Personally i don't care because when I do play im hyper casual but the whole prospect of it makes no sense to me.

How is purely for gatekeeping, when the main point of it is to have a better chance to select better candidates for your runs?

Yessss Yesss, poeple can buy it and everyone in this forum has seen a 2k rio player play worse than a 1.2k player and people with no rio and 200ilvl doing more dmg than people with 220ilvl.

Now go do statistics on how many people suck in 0-1.5k bracket per capita and how many people are booster in 2k+ score per capita.