Midnight New Mythic+ Affix: Lindormi's Guidance

[Biomega]

Than maybe you don't appreciate the value of "illusion of choice"?

No, I don't. People are often caught up in appearances and romantic ideas - their actual actions, choices, and demonstrated preferences frequently diverge. People very often SAY they like X, but then you give them a choice between X and Y and find that they tend to go with Y... sometimes while still saying they prefer X. That's just basic human psychology at work, and it's the job of a good developer to figure out what they'll actually prefer even if they say something else.

And to be sure: there's plenty of times where these things do align. But also plenty where they don't, so professed preference isn't simply dispositive. Demonstrated preference is.

It also doesn't mean it WOULD be a net positive. That's what you claim, but you're yet to provide a proof.

Proof is something reserved for logical abstract constructs, but if you mean evidence... There's plenty of evidence for the problems I'm describing (like tanks feeling reluctant to go into M+ because of routing) and plenty of evidence for demonstrated preference (like people's use of MDT).

Of course my voice matters. It has the exact same weight as that of every other customer.

Which is a singular zero. The only thing that matters is the aggregate. Individually, you're irrelevant.

Again, it's a video game. Wanting it to cater to ME doesn't make me some selfish villain; I have plenty of empathy where it actually matters.

I didn't suggest you're a selfish villain. I suggested you have trouble abstracting from personal preference to actual arguments. You can't seem to look past what you like - if that's all you want to communicate, that's fine. Nothing wrong with having preferences. It just isn't a discourse. It's just you telling everyone what you like, and them going "that's cool" and moving on.

Why the hyperbole? Not only it didn't collapse; m+ was and is a success.
And yes, tanks have been complaining for 20 years - because they play a role of big responsibility and low reward. You're trying to fix the issue by changing something that is, in the grand scheme of things, minor. Eliminating routing will do nothing for the fact that tanks play a thankless game; and will make the system less interesting (by your own admission).

I'll say this one more time and then stop, because apparently me saying it three times still hasn't made it come through. I'm not trying to fix everything about tanks. I'm trying to tear down one barrier that's keeping some tanks from going into M+ and that's the responsibility of routing. That's all. Nothing else. I never purported to somehow have a solution for tank responsibilities, and never once said this was somehow magically going solve other tank issues. I've repeatedly and quite vehemently rebuffed any notion that this is anything but a very specific solution for a very specific problem, and you have repeatedly responded to those insistences by pointing out how many other things this doesn't fix. I will not respond to this again. If you didn't understand it by now, there is no hope of communicating this point to you because you apparently refuse to acknowledge my actual position.

Route planning is not a problem. It's a feature.

To some.

To everyone else, it's a chore you have to check off, and they're doing everything from tools to arguments to not have to do it themselves. That is not the hallmark of a feature, that's the hallmark of an obstacle and barrier to entry.

[Rageonit]

No, I don't. People are often caught up in appearances and romantic ideas - their actual actions, choices, and demonstrated preferences frequently diverge. People very often SAY they like X, but then you give them a choice between X and Y and find that they tend to go with Y... sometimes while still saying they prefer X. That's just basic human psychology at work, and it's the job of a good developer to figure out what they'll actually prefer even if they say something else.

But... the dungeons I was talking about were voted for by actual players. So I'm not sure what you're trying to say here; players voted for big and open dungeons, which were played differently by different tanks this season. Is that not an evidence enough that there IS an actual variety in routing and that players want it to exist? Isn't that a "demonstrated preference"?

I didn't suggest you're a selfish villain. I suggested you have trouble abstracting from personal preference to actual arguments. You can't seem to look past what you like - if that's all you want to communicate, that's fine. Nothing wrong with having preferences. It just isn't a discourse. It's just you telling everyone what you like, and them going "that's cool" and moving on.

I already told you why - because, contrary to you, I don't pretend to know what would be a net positive and therefore I'm not ready to argue one side or another. I can only speak of my own experience and experience of people around me. Not that there is no evidence I'm not the only one enjoying open dungeons with variety of routes, see my previous post.

To some.

To everyone else, it's a chore you have to check off, and they're doing everything from tools to arguments to not have to do it themselves. That is not the hallmark of a feature, that's the hallmark of an obstacle and barrier to entry.

And yet, all the dungeons voted by actual players for a comeback in S3 are dungeons with highest route variance. Strange, no?

[Biomega]

Is that not an evidence enough that there IS an actual variety in routing and that players want it to exist? Isn't that a "demonstrated preference"?

No. Because routing isn't the only thing that sets those dungeons apart, and the selection wasn't free but from a preselection. You can't show what the dispositive factors behind people's choices were. It could be any number of things in any number of combinations.

People can also just like open dungeons for reasons other than routing. Perhaps simply for the banal reason of having space to move, say - which would be backed by the corollary, which is people hating dungeons that are tight quarters, like Tol Barad or Sanguine Depths. But there's no way to tell either way.

I already told you why - because, contrary to you, I don't pretend to know what would be a net positive and therefore I'm not ready to argue one side or another. I can only speak of my own experience and experience of people around me.

That's fine. It just isn't discourse. As I said: it's totally cool if all you want to do is tell us what you like. We've heard you. The end. Moving on. Singular preferences are interesting but entirely irrelevant. What you like doesn't matter.

[Rageonit]

No. Because routing isn't the only thing that sets those dungeons apart, and the selection wasn't free but from a preselection. You can't show what the dispositive factors behind people's choices were. It could be any number of things in any number of combinations.

Yes, and the preselection included dungeons with ample of space and more or less set routes (Cleft, Rookery and Stonevault are not particularly "tight" dungeons). Those dungeons weren't chosen.
Also, the chosen dungeons were PLAYED differently during the season, so the actual variance of routing was there.

But I see where this is going now. It's all a coincidence. It's kind of ironic that when finally I don't speak about my own preferences, but what other people chose via a vote (and how they played it), it's still not enough.

What you like doesn't matter.

Apparently what other people like (and do) also doesn't matter if it doesn't fit your narrative.

[Biomega]

Yes, and the preselection included dungeons with ample of space and more or less set routes (Cleft, Rookery and Stonevault are not particularly "tight" dungeons). Those dungeons weren't chosen.

But routing variance (which by the way, you haven't shown is actually "the highest" there in any way but be that as it may) isn't the only thing that differentiates those dungeons. Given the limited sample size, you can't draw any conclusions like this, because a selection even if it was pure chance would be dangerously close to the outcome, too. So this tells us absolutely nothing.

Also, the chosen dungeons were PLAYED differently during the season, so the actual variance of routing was there.

...but all modern-day dungeons have variance. Again, this tells us absolutely nothing.

what other people chose via a vote (and how they played it), it's still not enough.

Because you haven't shown the reasons behind their votes, in a VERY limited sample. I'm not even saying it shows they don't care about routing. I'm saying I have no idea what the reasons were. And neither do you.

You're just inventing metrics like "routing variance" and purporting they line up with the results. How did you determine any of this? How does it actually stack up?

You want to make super specific points - fine. But then you also need super specific data. You can't mix levels of granularity and go from "here's data" to "...and here's what I wildly speculate that data to mean". If you want to draw a conclusion from specific data, show how, specifically, that conclusion actually arises from the data.

But you won't.

You'll just go "...you haven't proven anything!" or "you have an impossible standard!" or "you're just in denial!" - anything to avoid having to put up.

That's fine. You've already said you just want to voice a preference. I can respect that. I just can't do anything with it other than nod, mumble "that there is a preference alright, this person sure has something they like yes they do", and move along.

[Rageonit]

You want to make super specific points - fine. But then you also need super specific data. You can't mix levels of granularity and go from "here's data" to "...and here's what I wildly speculate that data to mean". If you want to draw a conclusion from specific data, show how, specifically, that conclusion actually arises from the data.

Meanwhile, your "data" is people complaining on forums and you taking for granted (which one could call naivety) that it represents some kind of majority. That's all the evidence you've been able to provide. Or did I miss something?

..but all modern-day dungeons have variance. Again, this tells us absolutely nothing.

I'm not talking about what dungeons have; I'm talking about what players DO in those dungeons. Yes, only from my experience, but I do play m+ quite a lot, and I've seen tanks in those open dungeons go very different routes. Funnily enogh, in low to mid level dungeons - routes actually become more stale and formulaic the higher up you go.

[Biomega]

Meanwhile, your "data" is people complaining on forums and you taking for granted (which one could call naivety) that it represents some kind of majority. That's all the evidence you've been able to provide. Or did I miss something?

QED

I told you that instead of just proving your point and shutting me up with actual data, you'll just go "...you haven't proven anything!" instead.

It's almost like I've done this dance before!

Yes, only from my experience

Which, unfortunately, means absolutely nothing. You want to make a point using data like popularity polls, bring more than "well that's how I myself always do it, so".

But let's not derail this thread any further. You have nothing, and you're not interested in anything other than telling people your own preference and experience. This is going nowhere, because you've got nothing to say that actually leads to discourse.

[Rageonit]

It's almost like I've done this dance before!

If by that you mean that you've had many of those discussions here without providing any evidence, than yes, I agree.
Like right now - you still didn't provide any, and instead decided to go for a snarky remark.

Which, unfortunately, means absolutely nothing. You want to make a point using data like popularity polls, bring more than "well that's how I myself always do it, so".

But let's not derail this thread any further. You have nothing, and you're not interested in anything other than telling people your own preference and experience. This is going nowhere, because you've got nothing to say that actually leads to discourse.

Mind you, I don't need to prove anything, and my evidence doesn't have to be rock solid. We're just having a friendly discussion, no? So lets call it "circumstancial evidence". Am I 100% sure that people choosing those dungeons means they enjoy routing variance? No. Is there a possibility they do? Yes. But you didn't, even for a second, consider that though; instead, you demanded specific data, which you know I don't have.

And what do YOU offer in return? Claims of complaints and your belief that those complaints represent majority.

[Ghostile]

Who complains about routes in linear dungeons like Grimrail? Who complains about Halls of Atonement after Helkias?

I mean, the same people that complain about any routes.
They just don't undestand what m+ routes are and think its just about mob placement and not something like pack sizes and cooldown alignments.

[Relapses]

I mean, the same people that complain about any routes.
They just don't undestand what m+ routes are and think its just about mob placement and not something like pack sizes and cooldown alignments.

It's a little bit of both.

I think those arguing in favor of route-agnostic M+ are looking at the problem holistically: Routing and count itself is something of a vestige of older game design, emerging from Challenge Modes all the way back in MoP. The simple answers are usually the most elegant, and prior to CModes, nobody really cared about which direction you went in a dungeon as long as it was completed. There's room to explore within this design space, I think, but Blizzard would need to really upend the current status quo on a level that we haven't seen in over a decade.

[Biomega]

but Blizzard would need to really upend the current status quo on a level that we haven't seen in over a decade.

I don't think it'd actually be that big a deal. Changes like e.g. going from keys to a menu would be much bigger, whereas this wouldn't even need any real UI changes or big explanations or anything. It'd be very straightforward, mechanically, and the biggest change would be vibes. That's not exactly radical.

But I of course agree that Blizzard has been overly conservative in their design shifts and it's unlikely to actually happen.

[Nzx]

You have nothing, and you're not interested in anything other than telling people your own preference and experience. This is going nowhere, because you've got nothing to say that actually leads to discourse.

This is quite possibly the funniest thing I have ever read on this forum

[Duese]

No one who is running +2s - +5s gives enough of a fuck about routing to "create conflict" out of following BlizzRoute or not. They are either actual noobs, who don't know what a route is anyway, or people who are trying to gear alts.

If you're a DPS or healer main today, and you decide you want to try out a tank, the barrier to entry is massive. Not only do you have to learn everything you learn on a new DPS, but you have to learn your defensives and when to use them, what kills you and what doesn't, etc, and the only way to learn these in a 'live' environment is to go and lead some people through a dungeon. At the very least, this means you can click on the bright shiny mob and walk towards it for as long as it takes you to feel confident about the class, the spec, and the role before you take the training wheels off.

I don't think you understood the root of the problem I was highlighting in my comment. This won't fix the barrier to entry problem. This doesn't do anything to fix the barrier to entry problem. If anything, it makes the problem WORSE because it functionally creates the expectation of using that premade route and then you can't do it when you get past the first few levels. You will get past those first few levels just because of gear scaling.

This bit doesn't even mean anything. All of the challenge is artificial, it's a game. Routing as a layer of complexity among the rest of M+ design is a good thing, it just doesn't have a difficulty scale - it's entirely absent until it isn't, and then it's infinitely harder. This is creating a smaller step before you get dropped in the deep end.

Once again, I don't think you understood my comment.

Routing and timers are artificial challenges. They take the existing content and add an artificial external element (timer and enemy forces) in order to beat the content.

Creating artificial challenges is not a good thing. It adds shallow complexity to the game and this shallow complexity is the root cause of the problems we are seeing now and have been seeing for years.