Raider.IO reactions show you what kind of parents people had.

General Discussion
When you were a kid, at some point you probably encountered a group of kids that didn't want to play with you. If you went crying to your parents there were one of two reactions: either your parents told you to go find someone else to play with, or they went and told those kids off and made them include you.

For the record, it's the former category that got it right. No-one is obligated to spend time with you, and trying to force them too just makes them loathe you more.
*shrug* My mother was desperate to get me to play with other kids at all, so I guess that's a third reaction.

(Please stop reading that book and play with your guest!)
(I never asked for a guest. *Not said aloud, of course.*)
Virtually every group launched from LFG launches with all five of the five max players allowed. #6 didn't get invited because Blizzard's rules allow for five max and there's nothing any player can do about that.

To me this has nothing at all to do with the bullies who tell an otherwise friendly kid to go stand somewhere else just to be jerks. When they're young enough a teacher or parent should try to teach them better, for their own sakes. Past a certain age they're just being jerks on their own dime.
11/13/2018 11:13 PMPosted by Sacrosànct
When you were a kid, at some point you probably encountered a group of kids that didn't want to play with you. If you went crying to your parents there were one of two reactions: either your parents told you to go find someone else to play with, or they went and told those kids off and made them include you.

For the record, it's the former category that got it right. No-one is obligated to spend time with you, and trying to force them too just makes them loathe you more.


No one cares if they play with me. Go play with your own 1.5K IO people fora +2, it really means NOTHING to me if you do. I am just done with IO being a standard with only time completion being the factor in score. I would love to see other metrics such as Interrupts/DPS/HPS/Routing/etc to judge someone. I could get a 1K tank who only knows a route with a rouge and crumbles when tanking unfamiliar adds, alternatively I could get a 800 tank who is familiar with a straightforward path.

All IO will tell me is the 1K tank is better but now how he is better other than speed. And no, if you didnt like me then fine, have a nice life. Btw, your comparison is as bad as your score.
11/13/2018 11:30 PMPosted by Thunderçatz
11/13/2018 11:13 PMPosted by Sacrosànct
When you were a kid, at some point you probably encountered a group of kids that didn't want to play with you. If you went crying to your parents there were one of two reactions: either your parents told you to go find someone else to play with, or they went and told those kids off and made them include you.

For the record, it's the former category that got it right. No-one is obligated to spend time with you, and trying to force them too just makes them loathe you more.


No one cares if they play with me. Go play with your own 1.5K IO people fora +2, it really means NOTHING to me if you do. I am just done with IO being a standard with only time completion being the factor in score. I would love to see other metrics such as Interrupts/DPS/HPS/Routing/etc to judge someone. I could get a 1K tank who only knows a route with a rouge and crumbles when tanking unfamiliar adds, alternatively I could get a 800 tank who is familiar with a straightforward path.

All IO will tell me is the 1K tank is better but now how he is better other than speed. And no, if you didnt like me then fine, have a nice life. Btw, your comparison is as bad as your score.


Yeah I'm not a huge fan of m+ so I don't do many beyond the one 10+ a week for the cache.

Oh and completion time tells you a hell of a lot. Completing a 10+ on time requires good performance across those other factors.
11/13/2018 11:30 PMPosted by Thunderçatz
All IO will tell me is the 1K tank is better but now how he is better other than speed. And no, if you didnt like me then fine, have a nice life.


It has nothing to do with whether someone likes you or not. When you sign up for a group, you are a class and a number to the group leader. That's it. He knows nothing about you other than that class and number. Given that a higher number is statistically better than a lower number, the leader's gonna pick the highest number he can get. If that's not you, then too bad. It's not the group leader's fault for maximizing his chances of success by finding people with the highest score.
Thank you Mr. Psychobabble. Your unsubstantiated opinions and judgments about people you have never met and know nothing about have been noted.

You have been judged. You have been found wanting. Have a nice life.
"It encourages elitism and toxicity" is just not a relevant criticism of Raider.io. Which isn't to say that people aren't elitist and toxic, or even that people aren't quoting raider.io scores in a toxic and elitist way, but at the end of the day it's just the sum of the highest-level dungeons you've done, times ten, give or take a bit for timers. If you were to somehow outlaw multiplication, players would just find a different way to evaluate and then harshly judge one another.

What I think people are missing is that before r.io, the number pugs obsessed over was itemlevel (or, before that, gearscore), and it was terrible. And with gear RNG at previously-unheard-of levels, it would be even worse if we went back to that today. At least you have agency when it comes to raising your r.io score. Sure, it's BS that you can't make the leaderboards on Monday in an all-Area-51 group, for example (hopefully this gets fixed in 8.1) but for the most part it's a direct result of what you actually do in game rather than the random product of your weekly lootbox.

Pugging sucks, don't get me wrong. I get that a lot of people are grinding their face against a miserable pug-only experience and wishing that it could be better, or even thinking that anything to change this must be an improvement. But I'm telling you that as bad as you might think things are, they could be worse. They were worse, before raider.io made them slightly less bad.
This reminds me in school when the teacher would pick two students to be the team captain for whatever sport. Then the captain gets to pick his team make up based on whatever values he’s placed on making his team.

Currently IO seems to be the aid in helping the team captain (the guy/gal forming the group) determine who he wants on his/her team.

If there isn’t IO then I’m sure something else will take its place.

Is this hitting too close to home for some being the last picked on the team for dodgeball? It’s ok. There were times I was first and there were times I was last. If I didn’t want to be last, I would have volunteered to be the team Captain.
11/13/2018 11:44 PMPosted by Dirge
This reminds me in school when the teacher would pick two students to be the team captain for whatever sport. Then the captain gets to pick his team make up based on whatever values he’s placed on making his team.

Currently IO seems to be the aid in helping the team captain (the guy/gal forming the group) determine who he wants on his/her team.


Except that in WoW, nobody's picking the captains. In WoW captains are self-appointed and anyone can do it. They just need to put in the effort to lead a group. If people can't be bothered to do that, then they don't get to complain when they don't get into a group.
11/13/2018 11:30 PMPosted by Thunderçatz

No one cares if they play with me. Go play with your own 1.5K IO people fora +2, it really means NOTHING to me if you do. I am just done with IO being a standard with only time completion being the factor in score. I would love to see other metrics such as Interrupts/DPS/HPS/Routing/etc to judge someone. I could get a 1K tank who only knows a route with a rouge and crumbles when tanking unfamiliar adds, alternatively I could get a 800 tank who is familiar with a straightforward path.

All IO will tell me is the 1K tank is better but now how he is better other than speed. And no, if you didnt like me then fine, have a nice life. Btw, your comparison is as bad as your score.
wouldn't interrupts/dps/hps/routing/etc factor into time completion? i mean if all those things are great then the time finished will be great as well (as long as the rest of your group does their part)...and then your score goes up?

what it doesn't show is whether you were in bad groups. you can be the top 1% of players but can still fail a key if the rest of the group sucks. that's why if someone is a mid-core and up player wanting to run m+, he/she should raise their io score by running with friends/guildies as the chances of progressing is much better than relying on pug groups.
This is the kind of ugly garbage they should be handing out forum suspensions for.
If the narrative were "how can we give pug leaders better data than io scores" I would be so much more sympathetic to the anti-io crowd. I'd love to have dungeon-by-dungeon experience available on the groupfinder, for instance. Some groups I've been in were already using the r.io website itself to get that dungeon-by-dungeon info, by the way.

The funny thing about that, though, is that as frustrated as you might be that you've done a 12 waycrest but they won't let you into a 10 because you haven't done enough 5s of totally different dungeons, the inverse is kinda worse. With a catch-all number, you're incentivized to go and do dungeons at levels you haven't done. With a per-dungeon evaluation, you might get in a rut where you're stuck doing waycrest for your 10 every week because those are the ones you're accepted to, even though you'd really like to give freehold a try someday.

My ideal solution would be a hybrid of M+ and proving grounds. Variable difficulty, 4 npc teammates, just you and the actual mechanics of the dungeon. Leave people with nobody else to blame when stuff doesn't get interrupted/dispelled/etc. and a 100% bulletproof demonstration of familiarity with the content. It would be an absolute nightmare to actually implement, but it's a nice dream.
This. I could not have said this better if I tried. I would +1 again and again if I could.

No one cares if they play with me. Go play with your own 1.5K IO people fora +2, it really means NOTHING to me if you do. I am just done with IO being a standard with only time completion being the factor in score. I would love to see other metrics such as Interrupts/DPS/HPS/Routing/etc to judge someone. I could get a 1K tank who only knows a route with a rouge and crumbles when tanking unfamiliar adds, alternatively I could get a 800 tank who is familiar with a straightforward path.

All IO will tell me is the 1K tank is better but now how he is better other than speed. And no, if you didnt like me then fine, have a nice life. Btw, your comparison is as bad as your score.[/quote]
I was super anti social when I was a little kid. I used to take my favorite stuffed animal to the park so I didn't have to play with other kids. I can remember my mom trying to get me to leave it in the car lol.
11/13/2018 11:58 PMPosted by Hrumn
This is the kind of ugly garbage they should be handing out forum suspensions for.


The truth stings a little bit does it?
Most people don't realize that when they apply to join a group there's probably already 10+ applicants and a couple of them might be better credentialed than them.
Raider io is an invaluable tool and helpful if used in the right ways. I don't care if you have a ilev of 370, if the highest key you've completed was a 6, why would I bring you to a 10 or 11? I dont have the greatest score (920), but I can assure you the times I checked people versus not I had a much greater success rate. Don't have a high score? Play with a group of friends. Don't have those? Join a guild. Don't wanna be social? Go Candy crush.

Alternatively, they could make mythic + so easy people don't need to gate others. ;)
11/14/2018 12:14 AMPosted by Varb
11/13/2018 11:58 PMPosted by Hrumn
This is the kind of ugly garbage they should be handing out forum suspensions for.


The truth stings a little bit does it?


I guess so.

My main point is that most of the complaints about io seem to be aimed in this direction.

This applies doubly when you co rider that most people put in the group description whether or not they are pushing the key. When you have only done that dungeon on a 6, and your highest overall dungeon is an 8 you have no business being in a 12+ pushing. You'd mess it up for everyone in the group who wants to push. It's selfish.

I think people who harp on ilvl don't realise that high ilvl items can actually be a downgrade. Which is why when it came out you'd see people who didn't know any better sabotaging themselves by equipping higher ilvl gear that was worse overall.

In this was raider.io is a far better system. The only way to game the system is to pay for runs, and that is blindingly obvious after checking for a few seconds on the website.

There is only one way to get a decent io score, and that's by doing it properly. And these guys hate that.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum