Blizzard trying to dictate what is "meaningful".

[Aliven]

Few quotes for you that you may or may not find interesting:

"Numbers lie not when they are clearly wrong (that is obvious), but when they are subtly incorrect and it is hard to know they are wrong. You can use good judgement and make the right decision based on bad data, which in the end will be a bad decision."

and another one that i think is particularly pertinent here:

"Math can never 'lie', for it is based on certain 'assumptions' (axioms) which are 'true' by definition. But yes, mathematicians can (lie= unintentionally mislead the mathematical community)"

What it boils down to is the data could be misleading to begin with, then people rely on that data to produce guides etc, and then the second fault is when people simply blindly follow it without any understanding or investigation themselves.

Look at it this way - a low skilled player may, and often do perform far better by using a sub optimal spec. Sounds backwards, right? How could someone perform BETTER with a sub optimal spec? Simply put - they lack the ability to perform the more complex or difficult spec to its fullest, or even close. This has been true all the way back to early iterations of wow. Some specs had haste as the clear front runner, but due to subpar computers, and terrible internet connections, combined with poor play, some people really struggled to take advantage of high haste values, and for them, something like crit would produce better results.

Dont bring skill please. It screws everything. Yes, best player with bad talents would mop the floor and meters with bad player with perfect talents.

You cant predict skill. Thats why, in those comparision, there is always best player, with optimal strategy, best rotation and generaly flawless. And if that combination, while theoretically possible, is practically impossible then guides (good ones) would point that out.

If class A scales best with haste then it isnt changed if player controling class A cant deal with high haste value. Haste is still the best. Sure, that player may archieve better results with something else.

Dont bring individual skill level when talking about numbers. We can use that argument to promote whatever because for x player it is best. Lets be objective as much as possible.

[arkanon]

How did convents work out?

We have the numbers you know your wrong at this point.

Once again, this "data" is incomplete - it does show what classes have chosen what covenant, but thats ALL it shows. The key factor not taken into consideration is WHY they chose that covenant - many have very strong thematic ties, some dont. Some have great RP potential, some dont. Some are far simpler than others, and some are subjectively far more fun to play than others.

[Aliven]

This is completely flawed logic - because it makes the assumption that every single player in the entire game is motivated 100% by potential output, and cosmetics, themes, gameplay, enjoyment, RP, or any other potential and very valid motivation is "wrong".

Was talking about performance. Math. Not transmog, not themes, not preferences.

From numbers standpoint there is only wrong and correct answer. It really sucks.

[arkanon]

Dont bring skill please. It screws everything. Yes, best player with bad talents would mop the floor and meters with bad player with perfect talents.

You cant predict skill. Thats why, in those comparision, there is always best player, with optimal strategy, best rotation and generaly flawless. And if that combination, while theoretically possible, is practically impossible then guides (good ones) would point that out.

If class A scales best with haste then it isnt changed if player controling class A cant deal with high haste value. Haste is still the best. Sure, that player may archieve better results with something else.

Dont bring individual skill level when talking about numbers. We can use that argument to promote whatever because for x player it is best. Lets be objective as much as possible.

And you chose to ignore all the other points raised - what a surprise. Respond to the points being raised about your (false) claim that numbers done lie, and math cannot be wrong. I look forward to your response.

- - - Updated - - -

Was talking about performance. Math. Not transmog, not themes, not preferences.

From numbers standpoint there is only wrong and correct answer. It really sucks.

This is not true though, and I have shown you why. You are saying there is a clear cut case for best covenant, and the other 3 are the "wrong" choice - but thats not how this works. Some of the "best" covenants for raiding are next to useless on some fights, as they are aoe focused and the fights ST, or vice versa. You are relying on the "data" of which class chose which covenant, correct? Then my point still stands, and it is entirely irrefutable.

[huth]

Class has necro as best for M+, kyrian for PVP and then Faeries (forgot the names) for Raids then this is the answer. If you willingly go with that class as a necro to raid (and you could switch) then im sorry, you are just making wrong decision.

Only if switching is free. Which it isn't. Your point holds no water in the actual enviroment we're dealing with.

[Akibaboy]

It seems like the only people who like conduits energy are people who would never change their conduits anyway or people who don't play the game anymore.

Exactly. I switch them around on occasion maybe once every couple weeks. Honestly there shouldn't be conduit energy and there should be some kind of actual pain point to switch so that when I do, so that I am encouraged to make a build that gives me the most flexibility and coverage and not want to change on the fly. Just like there was for Talents back in the day.

If the take is that different setups are good for different situations (obviously), and therefor we need to be able to change said setups on the fly whenever... then honestly just get rid of the system altogether. Get rid of Conduits. Get rid of Covenants. Get rid of Talents. Get rid of the different Stats and just make 1 - Damage Power. If every "choice" needs to be the perfect right answer for every micro-scenario, then why have choice at all? Just automatically make it so on each boss you're buffed by an NPC that says "Hey Druid! You have 'Cascading Moonlight' now for this fight only! That means you're good at cleave because it's a cleave fight!" Really though, why go through the dog and pony show of pretending like your build is yours and matters? Why have builds that have strengths and weaknesses when all that does is prompt you to sand away its rough edges by changing it every two seconds? Is clicking around a UI every 12 minutes to make sure that your class has strengths and strengths / ups and ups *only* actually good game design?

Once Conduit Energy is "fixed", there will be some other game ending catastrophe that makes this kind of player question everything. First it was loot rates (that were in line with 1.0 - 4.3) that were the absolute worst thing ever and ruined Shadowlands, then it was completely optional anima that was the worst thing ever that NEEDED a buff, and now Conduits are making the game unplayable. I'm sure the next crusade a week after Conduit Energy will be something totally inconsequential like 5% spell variance making this the literally worst game ever made.

[huth]

And you chose to ignore all the other points raised - what a surprise. Respond to the points being raised about your (false) claim that numbers done lie, and math cannot be wrong. I look forward to your response.

Well, technically it's true; numbers don't lie and math itself cannot be wrong by definition. But that doesn't mean that the people using them are infallible, and Aliven keeps missing that math doesn't say what they claim because they keep using an non-existent situation where you can just switch Covenants willy-nilly.

Ex falso sequitur quodlibet.

[arkanon]

Well, technically it's true; numbers don't lie and math itself cannot be wrong by definition. But that doesn't mean that the people using them are infallible, and Aliven keeps missing that math doesn't say what they claim because they keep using an non-existent situation where you can just switch Covenants willy-nilly.

Ex falso sequitur quodlibet.

Read the quotes I provided - Math is only as good as the data it is based off - same goes for statistics, or anything numbers based. The second quote is the most impactful i think, as in this context, its players blindly following what some online guide shows them, because "math cant be wrong", without investigating what data they used to come to their conclusions. That might explain why certain guides are DIFFERENT - how could this be possible if math doesnt lie? How could this be possible if numbers cant be wrong? Simple - the people using the numbers to draw their conclusion have made multiple errors in the process, but as some see them as an authority on the subject, they dont question it and follow the advice.

To simplify; 2+2=4. simple as that. But what if in practice, one of those twos actually results in a 1? The math is correct, 2+2=4, but it SHOULD have been 1+2, which we all (mostly at least) know =3. This is often seen when people misrepresent data sets, use far too small sample sizes, or use outdated data. This is why sites that are not updated often are horribly wrong - i had a raider who claimed his spec was best because noxxic said so - yes, noxxic - they just assumed that was the best site to use and that, as everyone keeps saying, "the numbers cant lie, and math is never wrong" so he looked at the graphs, looked at the spec advice, and off he went - never once did he question, compare, or investigate that data or source of data at all. It was about 9 months outdated.

I think this is why discords and communities are a FAR better source of information and advice, as it is typically very up to date and comes from people actually performing the tests, both in sims, AND in game. Still open to errors and mistakes? yeah, absolutely, but they are usually identified and quashed pretty quickly.

[Crimson Spears]

Once again, this "data" is incomplete - it does show what classes have chosen what covenant, but thats ALL it shows. The key factor not taken into consideration is WHY they chose that covenant - many have very strong thematic ties, some dont. Some have great RP potential, some dont. Some are far simpler than others, and some are subjectively far more fun to play than others.

Sure love... I am not gonna debate your faith just point at the math that shows A OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, you keep preaching its all rp lad.

[arkanon]

Sure love... I am not gonna debate your faith just point a the math that shows A OVERWHELMING MAJORITY, you keep preaching its all rp lad.

No need for childish insults and passive aggressive name calling, im pointing out a very honest flaw in your logic - you are extrapolating results from data that the data does not, and cannot show. It is actually YOU that is relying on blind faith to support your claim, and I am correctly using the data. The data shows what percentage of certain classes/specs have chosen which covenant - what it absolutely does not, and CANNOT show is WHY each person picked that covenant. This is an irrefutable fact, and no amount of mental gymnastics will change that.

Its no different than the people who make ridiculous claims such as "people have quit this game because [random reason]". They may be very right that people have quit the game, but they do NOT know why. It boils down to correlation vs causation.

[huth]

Read the quotes I provided - Math is only as good as the data it is based off - same goes for statistics, or anything numbers based.

That's still user error, however. The math is correct and numbers by themself do not lie... but if you use the math incorrectly and feed it random values, you're not getting anything useful out of it.

It's not math that lies, it's people deliberately or ignorantly misusing it. If you feed garbage in, you're only getting garbage out, but that isn't the fault of the garbage or the math.

The second quote is accurate but doesn't disagree with what i say. The problem isn't in the math, it's in the mathematician using it. The first one is iffy, because the problem isn't the numbers themself, but people reading things into them that aren't there or not verifying that they're actually using the correct numbers (which may not always be fully possible, but that's what error bars are for).

[arkanon]

That's still user error, however. The math is correct and numbers by themself do not lie... but if you use the math incorrectly and feed it random values, you're not getting anything useful out of it.

It's not math that lies, it's people deliberately or ignorantly misusing it. If you feed garbage in, you're only getting garbage out, but that isn't the fault of the garbage or the math.

The second quote is accurate but doesn't disagree with what i say. The problem isn't in the math, it's in the mathematician using it. The first one is iffy, because the problem isn't the numbers themself, but people reading things into them that aren't there or not verifying that they're actually using the correct numbers (which may not always be fully possible, but that's what error bars are for).

Yes, so we agree completely.

[huth]

Yes, so we agree completely.

Yes, i suppose so.

[El Gucaragua]

Let's just get into it straight away. "Meaningful" content is extremely subjective. For some people transmog is meaningful. For other people gold farming is meaningful. It completely depends on who you are. So the idea that Blizzard can tell us "this is a meaningful choice" is absolutely insane. Because it only holds meaning if it has meaning for the specific person.

In the latest Preach Interview Ion said two things concerning the Conduit Energy that really annoys me:

1) "They wanted to avoid another system where you swap to Conduits on every boss."

Why? Why is it a problem if a few players wants to swap Conduits for every boss? It's a part of class customization. And most players wont do it anyway just like most players don't even change talents between bosses. Why do you have to make these unnecessarily restrictive rules just because a few players are going to swap conduits on every boss. Also, it's not like the conduits have any complexity. It's just another passive talent row.

2) "They want to avoid situations where people are swapping every day, but every week, that's something they want to accommodate."

Again, WHY?! Why is it a problem if people swap conduits every day? You cannot dictate this to be a "meaningful choice" just because you want it to be. Most people pick the strongest spec and the strongest conduits for that spec anyway. That's already not meaningful for us. My transmog is a more meaningful choice to me than my conduits. The only thing these restrictions achieve is stopping people from having fun with off specs.

I agree with the examples listed below, however there is one thing I do disagree with.

Sure, content being 'meaningful' to a person is entirely subjective, but providing a 'meaningful choice' is not specifically because it's the designers giving us the choices to make. Games require meaningful choices to even be a game, it's probably their most important characteristic. So while a player making a choice is based on how they feel, the concept of meaningful choice is entirely objective. So since we're talking about WoW, let's use Covenants.

In order for the system to have real meaningful choice, as an objective principal of games, when we tie player power to it we no longer have a meaningful choice. We need to remember that in a game like WoW many people care about optimization, many people care about convenience. So if we have player power attached, most people aren't making the choice they probably would have if there was no player power attached. And player power being attached could still have worked, if for instance we got four new abilities, or four upgrades to pre-existing abilities, or something in-between.

This is probably longer than it needed to be since I made my main statement, but to this day and surely for the rest of Shadowlands I will never not be annoyed by Blizzard claiming Covenant selection is 'meaningful choice', because it simply isn't. Again though, 100% agree with the two examples given. Blizzard have gotten better at listening, but they still have work to do on that front. Specifically in terms of feedback to systems design.

[arkanon]

Yes, i suppose so.

Dont panic - its ok to agree with me, nothing bad will happen to you, I promise. I think my biggest issue comes from LFR / Normal players who claim "I am FORCED to pick X even though I really enjoy Y!!!!" which is absolute rubbish, even now in mythic you can run w/e covenant you want and no one will really notice. The same goes for class, spec, and talents, although there are certainly some niche situations where a certain talent really shines - mass entanglement is an example that over the years has proven invaluable on specific parts of specific encounters.

[pewpmeiser]

For any choice to be meaningful you have to actually make a choice. If you can make a different choice five minutes later it's barely a choice and definitely not meaningful.

This guy just gets it.

[Crimson Spears]

No need for childish insults and passive aggressive name calling, im pointing out a very honest flaw in your logic - you are extrapolating results from data that the data does not, and cannot show. It is actually YOU that is relying on blind faith to support your claim, and I am correctly using the data. The data shows what percentage of certain classes/specs have chosen which covenant - what it absolutely does not, and CANNOT show is WHY each person picked that covenant. This is an irrefutable fact, and no amount of mental gymnastics will change that.

Its no different than the people who make ridiculous claims such as "people have quit this game because [random reason]". They may be very right that people have quit the game, but they do NOT know why. It boils down to correlation vs causation.

I mean at this point Ion has gone on record with the problem. I am just not a follower of the first church of rp.

[arkanon]

I mean at this point Ion has gone on record with the problem. I am just not a follower of the first church of rp.

Interesting that you focus in on RP, but ignore cosmetics, mounts, story, preferred zone/npc's, gameplay, fun/enjoyment of the ability - you just hand wave all of those away instantly because it messes with the narrative. This forum is chock full of casuals explaining they hate min/max culture and just want to play what they want and enjoy it - they claim to be the overwhelming majority of the player base - players motivated by something other than raw performance, and yet you entirely dismiss them all?

[Queen of Hamsters]

Huh, fancy that. Most of the times when someone's tried to lecture me on what constitutes "meaningful" in this game, it's been an MMO-C nobody.

The literal creators of the game have access to literal figures on player engagement. If they want to see changes, that's their prerogative, sad to say considering their stance on how classes should play as of Legion.

[arkanon]

Huh, fancy that. Most of the times when someone's tried to lecture me on what constitutes "meaningful" in this game, it's been an MMO-C nobody.

The literal creators of the game have access to literal figures on player engagement. If they want to see changes, that's their prerogative, sad to say considering their stance on how classes should play as of Legion.

I would actively avoid any discussion based on if something is meaningful or not, as by its very nature, it is entirely subjective. I think its fair to say in this context, a video game, we could say the most accurate definition would be "worthwhile". For me, farming WQ and reps is not worthwhile, but for someone else it might be their main motivation for playing the game. For them, Reps are meaningful, for me, they are not - no one is right, no one is wrong.