Ideas to reduce DF disagreements

A while back someone made a thread mentioning how they wished PF had some different settings for when they were trying to farm things which allowed the requirement of more than one clear to join. I don't remember it exactly but between that being in the back of my mind and all the talk of the differences in playstyle lately I've been thinking... can we do something like this for DF?

As a caveat there is already a 15 page thread titled "elitism and casualism" and if you'd like to discuss the merits or downsides of either please head over there, that's not what this thread is for. This is my attempt to put a band aid on what I see as a bad bad thing many people encounter on a daily basis.

The way I see it we have three main groups of players in the game for the purposes of content we fill (on NA/EU at least) via DF. We've got people who expect big pulls and competence(Group A), people who tend to go with the flow of wherever they're thrown (Group B) and people who will expect things to be taken slowly (Group C). I'm trying to not use any disparaging language for any of the groups here, hence generic names.

Group A and Group C don't get along great. Whether you've got a tank from Group A doing fullpulls but dps or a healer from other groups unable to keep up or maybe a pair of players from A or C who will vote kick other players who don't play like them at the end of the day people have different standards that they're holding other players to whether that's by expecting competence or expecting for their own incompetence to be catered to.

So I was thinking what if these preferences could be flagged in DF, similar to being willing to join in progress?

Yes, players with only one or the other side chosen would invariably experience longer queues - that would be a trade they'd be consciously making. The game would default to both options chosen but at some point later on (perhaps around 50, as things begin to open up?) there would just be a reminder to select whichever you'd prefer.

This would have basically zero impact on the Group B people, they'd have both selected by default and they'd still be able to be paired with anyone. For people selecting only A or C they could have their preferences accepted by their teammates and, if those teammates didn't actually want to play that way, they'd have an actually valid reason for vote kicking instead of falling back on the old "differing playstyles" but being unable to fully articulate the issue in chat.

You joined a Group C party and will only chain pull? Well, that's now a viable reason to kick you. You joined Group A but you're a zero dps healer? Gurl, bye.

Let me be very clear - I wish that artificial barriers between sections of the playerbase weren't a thing I was considering. If we were all able to just talk to each other and give/take advice like normal people while adjusting and respecting those around us this wouldn't be an issue. Sadly... we can't. Or don't. I'm not sure which.

SE has created a game that basically has two separate games going on within it - that is their mistake. You can't put content like TEA in the game and expect the people completing it to also be willing to sit in their 'expert' roulette for thirty minutes because internet strangers want to take things slow. Conflict will arise. I think this is a way to cut out some of that friction and let us all play the game we want instead of playing the game we may be forced to by others.

And just because I'm sure it'll be one of the first responses - yes, I'm aware everyone could just accept everyone they get paired with in DF no matter what. I'm sorry that I've got a full time job and don't haves a limitless amount of time to spend carrying people through basic content. If you want to do that third would not inhibit you directly in any way, it would only reduction your exposure to "elitism" which very much seems like something you guys would like.

So... thoughts? Alternative ideas? I'm curious.

On paper is not a bad idea but my own experience tells me that people are going to join those groups that are more likely to clear stuff. So, we are going to have some players wanting to join groups they do not belong, just like already happens with PF.

I can create a clearing party for X content, not a practice one, and people can still join without any experience hoping for a free clear. Or the other way around, with people expecting a clear and rage when we wipe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driavna

On paper is not a bad idea but my own experience tells me that people are going to join those groups that are more likely to clear stuff. So, we are going to have some players wanting to join groups they do not belong, just like already happens with PF.

I can create a clearing party for X content, not a practice one, and people can still join without any experience hoping for a free clear. Or the other way around, with people expecting a clear join and rage when we wipe.

---

While this is undoubtedly an issue, I don't think TCs suggesting would be impacted in quite the same way.

What they're advocating isn't directly related to the ability to clear the content, rather person preference as to how that content is dealt with.
If you want to go slow, you're not going to choose option A, and if you abhor single pulls, you'll tick off option B. If you're versatile, you'll select both.

In practice, it's not too dissimilar from language settings.
The only issue is people ticking both for quicker queues when they're not genuinely 'versatile', like how people select all languages to get quicker queues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seraphor

While this is undoubtedly an issue, I don't think TCs suggesting would be impacted in quite the same way.

What they're advocating isn't directly related to the ability to clear the content, rather person preference as to how that content is dealt with.
If you want to go slow, you're not going to choose option A, and if you abhor single pulls, you'll tick off option B. If you're versatile, you'll select both.

In practice, it's not too dissimilar from language settings.
The only issue is people ticking both for quicker queues when they're not genuinely 'versatile', like how people select all languages to get quicker queues.

---

This is just my opinion based on my own experiences: a certain playstyle is less likely to clear content and it's more dependant on others to help them. An example is 24m raids.

We do have a function similar to what you’re suggesting in the Raid Finder. Granted, it’s very limited since choosing to be paired into a “Practice” run only lets you choose between “First phase” or “Final phase”.

If it were to be implemented, the function already exists — just needs to be reworked a bit to work for the Duty Finder. Though, there is a chance that implementing such an option may spike queue times for players with certain playstyles, which is something the devs probably don’t really want to happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamFyi

We do have a function similar to what you’re suggesting in the Raid Finder. Granted, it’s very limited since choosing to be paired into a “Practice” run only lets you choose between “First phase” or “Final phase”.

If it were to be implemented, the function already exists — just needs to be reworked a bit to work for the Duty Finder. Though, there is a chance that implementing such an option may spike queue times for players with certain playstyles, which is something the devs probably don’t really want to happen.

---

And this shows exactly the problem. Even when raidfinder was used a bit, people didn't use it as intended. They'd join final phase practice or clear parties with no experience.

That said, I don't think it's a bad idea to try to find some solution. GMs giving people a blank check to kick anyone for "differences of playstyle" is a rather brutal cudgel they've given us to sort it out amongst ourselves.

I can see this like the checkboxes for language preferences in DF settings. You could have them like: "Big pulls", "small pulls", "First time tank/dps/heal" "Lore exploration" and so on.

However, the cynic in me can't help but agree with Driavna's first post. It's similar to how people check all the language checkboxes in the DF settings to curb their queue time. I don't know the logistics of Group A and C but if we were to pretend for a minute that there's way more people in Group A than C, the latter would probably select all the preferences if they find their queue time unbearable.

I dunno, it's more a player issue than something that devs should meddle...
A fast clear is awesome, but I don't mind if as a tank I gotta do smaller pulls.
Same way, it's nice when someone that says "first time" challenge themselves.
What we need is to get out of auto mode and remember that there are people at the otherside. Talk, challenge, laugh... If fails, move on.
Doing 50 times the same thing is insane, do it mindlessly is not human.
After I brought my nephew of 10 yo to play, I always wonder if the otherside is a child, a person with physical challege or hell, a person that had a bad day.
I would rather have a fast run. But if the opposite occurs, I take my time to devour the design of the dungeon, toss some cheesy jokes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Driavna

This is just my opinion based on my own experiences: a certain playstyle is less likely to clear content and it's more dependant on others to help them. An example is 24m raids.

---

I do think perhaps it would need to be limited to dungeons, as far as I'm able to tell when it comes to trials/raids and especially 24m raids it seems to be part of the encounter design that a fraction of the party being competent will allow for the entire group to clear.

I think this is why in some of the mechanically "tougher" casual fights you see comparatively less in the way of strict dps checks and stack markers - they kind of seem to expect that a portion of the group will be on the ground. I did a 17 minute e4n once that was essentially trio-ed between a DRK, BRD and myself on WHM because people just couldn't remain standing. Than god there was no "needing other people alive" mechanics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdamFyi

Though, there is a chance that implementing such an option may spike queue times for players with certain playstyles, which is something the devs probably don’t really want to happen.

---

I agree that there would certainly be an increase in queue times. I think they could do a few things to help limit this like discounting your preference when queued via Mentor Roulette (because realistically you should be prepared to get anything) and matching playstyle over language, at least for Group A where it's unlikely much communication will be necessary.

I do think that ultimately the larger queue increase will happen in Group C and I admit it definitely bothers me less because I wouldn't be in there myself. I think it's fair overall though, if you're entering content with a mindset of "it can take however long it takes" and you're alright with things like single pulls and zero dps healers... do you have much room to complain about a few more minutes in the queue? In my opinion, no. You've always got the option to check the other box and play in a manner that more heavily favors a respect of yours and other players time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

That said, I don't think it's a bad idea to try to find some solution. GMs giving people a blank check to kick anyone for "differences of playstyle" is a rather brutal cudgel they've given us to sort it out amongst ourselves.

---

I agree! While I have come to terms with the idea of the silent kick I very much wish it wasn't a corner I found myself pushed into. It would be nice to be able to not have to sacrifice either my own time or someone else's in the interest of just playing a game in the limited time I have for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SenorPatty

I can see this like the checkboxes for language preferences in DF settings. You could have them like: "Big pulls", "small pulls", "First time tank/dps/heal" "Lore exploration" and so on.

However, the cynic in me can't help but agree with Driavna's first post. It's similar to how people check all the language checkboxes in the DF settings to curb their queue time. I don't know the logistics of Group A and C but if we were to pretend for a minute that there's way more people in Group A than C, the latter would probably select all the preferences if they find their queue time unbearable.

---

Well, they'd certainly be able to do so... they'd just then find themselves held to the standard of those queues. If you're tanking let's see those full pulls, I want to hear some Holy going off, use your AoE, etc.

I think it could help incentivize some people who may be less than invested in their own improvement to maybe sink an extra ten or fifteen minutes into reading a guide on their job in order to save time on their queues in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brightmore

I dunno, it's more a player issue than something that devs should meddle...

---

I disagree. The devs created this situation through what I would consider mismanagement of the direction of the playerbase, the least they could do is give us a way to avoid the people in DF who have been pushed in the opposite direction to ourselves.

I'll be very clear - if you don't know how to play your job at a basic level (not you specifically, a general 'you') nor are you willing to accept and implement advice on how to do so then I have no interest in playing with you. I'm not alone in that mentality. Since we've all but criminalized unsolicited advice the only other option available to me is to avoid the people I would otherwise be advising. It has to be one or the other, I don't want to just sit there and carry people who can't bother to even try.

I mean, this seems reasonable enough. The worst case scenario is people lying (which isn’t something we can prevent) or maybe a disparity in queue times (but we honestly don’t have the data to tell how large one group is from the other), but as it seems like a solution that may at least reduce issues I would be for it. Worst case scenario aren’t we just right where we started?

If Trusts have shown us anything. People aren't going to use a system like this, especially those who are looking to be carried. There's literally zero reason to do less than medium pulls in 71+ dungeons because the Trust system exists. So if you want to take it slow, they're the perfect option. And yet, you still see plenty of people who won't use them. Why? They're too slow.

That being said, I think the system still has merit since kicking people who lie to get in would eventually discourage it. Alas, the devs would never implement something like this as they've outright said they want better players to "pick up the slack" for inexperienced ones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Risvertasashi

And this shows exactly the problem. Even when raidfinder was used a bit, people didn't use it as intended. They'd join final phase practice or clear parties with no experience.

---

Mhm. It works on an honour system where you expect everyone to be truthful, but generally isn’t ever the case which is its biggest flaw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

You've always got the option to check the other box and play in a manner that more heavily favors a respect of yours and other players time.

---

Pretty much. It’s hard to tell how much of an impact it‘d actually cause on queue times. We don’t have the statistics for that. I think the devs want to avoid implementing this kind of system because it sounds more like a punishment rather than an incentive. Players who want quick queues but aren’t up to par would probably go for the option that has a larger player pool instead of waiting with the longer queue. Might cause an increases in players getting kicked from dungeons (for difference in playstyle) which isn’t something the devs would take to kindly.

Maybe instead, the selection would be differentiated between “Expert play” and “Casual play”? It isn’t the best solution, but at the least players have a rough idea of what kind of run they’d be looking for. Players are more receptive to positive feedback rather than negative ones i.e. feeling pressured to click the “faster” option because everyone else is doing it. Reminded me of another game that lets you “avoid” certain players. Eventually some players got avoided by thousands upon thousands of players that it took several hours just for their one queue to pop to the point where the devs had to remove the system entirely.

It's never a good idea to segregate based on playstyle. one mode or the other will end up being known as the queue that never pops so everyone will just default to the one that works and then you've just wasted dev time creating modes that never pop.

My opinion may be unpopular, but honestly, harder mandatory solo content with fail conditions.

Until the game itself cares that people learn to play the game at a skill level just above "being totally afk" we really aren't going to see an avereage improvement to the playerbase's average skill level.

Another thing that would help and maybe not kill the dps meter requests, but at least slow them down, is to have a personal ranking screen at the end of an instance like wildstar

https://i.imgur.com/6sPWleO.png

No one could see anyone's rank but theirs. There isn't enough context for you to have to link it to any parties you're looking to join. But it gave you enough information to say "huh, I'm a dps class ranked x+1 for dps when there are only x dps in the party, I guess I need to see what I'm doing wrong"
(Also if you haven't played wildstar, that screenshot is a gd feat of strength and the group that achieved it should be honored and feared.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrWho2010

It's never a good idea to segregate based on playstyle. one mode or the other will end up being known as the queue that never pops so everyone will just default to the one that works and then you've just wasted dev time creating modes that never pop.

---

The player base does that by itself anyway, tbh. Between party finder listings (the ones that aren't trap parties), statics and the various "playstyle differences" that happen through the DF we sort ourselves out as needed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

If Trusts have shown us anything. People aren't going to use a system like this, especially those who are looking to be carried. There's literally zero reason to do less than medium pulls in 71+ dungeons because the Trust system exists. So if you want to take it slow, they're the perfect option. And yet, you still see plenty of people who won't use them. Why? They're too slow.

---

I'd argue that you need to level them up to run the dungeons with them (except on your inital unlock of the dungeon in the MSQ) is keeping alot of people away from using them even after the exp gain buff. I love using them for Glamour farm thugh because with them *all the loot are belong to me;)*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForteNightshade

If Trusts have shown us anything. People aren't going to use a system like this, especially those who are looking to be carried. There's literally zero reason to do less than medium pulls in 71+ dungeons because the Trust system exists. So if you want to take it slow, they're the perfect option. And yet, you still see plenty of people who won't use them. Why? They're too slow.

That being said, I think the system still has merit since kicking people who lie to get in would eventually discourage it. Alas, the devs would never implement something like this as they've outright said they want better players to "pick up the slack" for inexperienced ones.

---

If trusts have shown us anything is that people play MMOs to play with other players and not NPCs... I mean, I don't care for either side of this discussion but come on

All i can think of is that no one would ever pick C, so they'd all just end up in B, which would then bleed into A, and everything would be very much the same as it is now.

Honestly...
I just want a setting I can toggle so if I run as a DPS with, say, aiming gear, I don't get into a ground with another aiming job.
When I'm trying to farm a gear drop from The Grand Cosmos, it finally drops, and the other NIN gets it... I'm ready to cry.
Let DPS into 4 man's in comps where they don't compete when rolling NEED on gear.
That's all I want.

The only roulette I could see this being reasonable for is Levelling Roulette, and maybe 50/60/70. If someone wants to 'take it slow' at level-cap content, then the nicest thing I can say is that "they are wrong".

The game could use some incentive for people at 80 to run the levelling roulette (or for anyone to run the 567); so there's that too. Maybe even a bonus if they agree to go with people not so sure of themselves? /shrug

I don't think it's a bad idea overall, but I'm not really sure how much legitimate use it would get especially if it bumped up the queue time. The more casual players would probably end up hedging their bets by selecting the A option and hoping they got along okay. Even the A option players would start hedging their bets too if the higher time spent in the queue started to eclipse the time they would save by running only with faster playing team mates.

And, really, it could be a tough fit for players who find themselves somewhere in the middle too. As an example, maybe they're new to tanking but want to try starting to push themselves. If they go A route they'll get crapped on by the hardcore crowd for not being good enough but then they'll be playing above the level of the C route players. Sure you could say that the players they end up with should just be understanding and communicate respectfully.. but if that was an option then we wouldn't need a change to the DF in the first place.

I wouldn't mind having that option. And I also wouldn't mind having a longer queue if it means I don't have to chase some tank that's had too many Red Bulls. There was a whole dungeon plot about that, and I don't think a lot of people paid attention to it.

I don't like to rush through anything, whether it's an MMO or singleplayer. So it would be nice to queue with people in DF who want to just take it easy and maybe chat about the dungeon, instead of aggravating my likely developing carpal tunnel. I have nowhere to be, and speeding through a dungeon is not my cup of tea.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

Snip

So... thoughts? Alternative ideas? I'm curious.

---

So... what should Square put as the tick options on the DF menu?

(A) Competent people.
(B) Relaxed people.
(C) Take it slow people.

???

Since you say only people in group A expect competence, clearly insinuating that B and C people are not. Not really sure people would be happy about that.

To wit: I think this is unnecessary. If anything, such a thing will breed even more elitism and schism between players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaughingBanana

So... what should Square put as the tick options on the DF menu?

(A) Competent people.
(B) Relaxed people.
(C) Take it slow people.

???

Since you say only people in group A expect competence, clearly insinuating that B and C people are not. Not really sure people would be happy about that.

To wit: I think this is unnecessary. If anything, such a thing will breed even more elitism and schism between players.

---

such options would be absolutely hilarious but yes i agree segregation of the player base is a bad idea. if joe tryhard can't stand to be paired with kevin wanna stop and smell the bushes then make your own party finder or just go with friends that you trust to play at your level.

The problem is expectations, frankly you're never gonna please most people playing..

If some people dread so much to meet players of different playstyles, they can already use the PF to avoid that. Just open up some "zero dps healer, single targeting in a pack or small pulls = kick" or "leave your salt in the kitchen" partys when doing your daily roulettes, and you are done. You know, in the same category that is only used by RMTs to sell their runs, and strangely never by legit players who could have a use for it.

I would say no.

Back then the fastest way to level was to spam dungeons. As a new player, leveling tank and healer for the first time was very scary. I was afraid of big pulls, but I learned to accept them and they became the norm for me. It was thanks to the players who pushed me to try it. If not for them, I would probably still be single pulling and panic healing till max level. When you're leveling via dungeon spam, big pulls become the norm and you'd get used to them pretty fast.

Big pulls or smaller pulls, the dungeon will be cleared.
I'd accept doing small pulls if the group had a weaker link (Under-geared tank/healer or very low DPS). In this case, going with smaller pulls is the smart option.

As someone who mostly avoids random groups, with an option to choose my preferred pace I'd give it another chance. I think one particularly nice thing about it would be that when my group is short one or two people we could then use the duty finder to fill that spot. Technically we COULD, right now, but none of us want to put some random person expecting a speed run in that position. Partly because we don't want to deal with any possible friction but also because it does seem unfair to force our play style on an unsuspecting stranger.

As others have pointed out already, segregating the playerbase is not in their interests and would easily cause more harm than good. Yoshi-P has said on record that the point of roulettes is to fill queues; dividing them into 3 categories weakens the queues, making them take longer and completely defeats the point of the roulettes. (Which also, lets be honest. The vast majority will queue for al three or whichever of the three has the quickest queues, regardless of what their own self-perception may be, rendering this system ineffective on that front.)

The roulette bonuses are there as payment for dealing with the randomness the roulette will chuck at a player, whether dungeon or player related. There's already plenty of options for people to avoid playing with people they'd have issues with (create a PF, play as tank/healer + queue with a friend as the other so you two control the pace of the dungeon, votekick someone who's not in the mindset of the majority of the group for differences in playstyle, etc.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaughingBanana

So... what should Square put as the tick options on the DF menu?

(A) Competent people.
(B) Relaxed people.
(C) Take it slow people.

---

I'm not sure that this is necessary; I think it might cause more trouble than it solves. But I do think it's possible to phrase the options in a way that wouldn't be too objectionable.

Preferred Playstyle:

• Aggressive: I prefer my groups pull multiple groups of mobs and try to burn them down fast with all roles focused on doing as much damage as possible, favoring speed of clear even where it might increase risk.
• Circumspect: I prefer my groups grab smaller groups of mobs and focus on playing more strictly to their roles, favoring reduced risk even where it might increase the length of time the duty requires to finish.
• No Preference: I have no preference and will happily run duties in either style, whatever others prefer.

I can see all of the arguments here and all have some merit. As a new player and one who admittedly does not have the agility of most of the player base ( I am old, I admit it) I am grateful for the help I receive from most of the players I have encountered. I recently completed the Praetorium with a group that was very patient with me, even when I didn't get all the way on the elevator to find my suit of armor. In fact one of them actually came back for me. I know that may have been inconvenient to them and time consuming but I appreciate it very much. I wish I had caught the name of the person who came back for me to thank them personally but I did not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanjien

I can see all of the arguments here and all have some merit. As a new player and one who admittedly does not have the agility of most of the player base ( I am old, I admit it) I am grateful for the help I receive from most of the players I have encountered. I recently completed the Praetorium with a group that was very patient with me, even when I didn't get all the way on the elevator to find my suit of armor. In fact one of them actually came back for me. I know that may have been inconvenient to them and time consuming but I appreciate it very much. I wish I had caught the name of the person who came back for me to thank them personally but I did not.

---

Castrum and particularly Praetorium are both such odd instances with so many weird roadblocks for new players I wouldn't begrudge anyone needing help navigating either, especially with the unskippable cutscene now.

I'm certainly not saying my line in the sand is between new or experienced players, personally I just know the speed with which both I and a lot of peers would like to complete dungeon content and that it doesn't line up well with people who... don't want that.

It's definitely not a dig at people who are new and learning, it's just quality of life for me. If I've run something quite literally more than a hundred times the scenery just isn't holding me anymore. I wanna escape with my shiny rewards. I'd rather not do that by inadvertently inconveniencing or harming the experience of others but I also don't always want to sacrifice my own time and enjoyment either.

And so this thread was born \o/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaughingBanana

So... what should Square put as the tick options on the DF menu?

(A) Competent people.
(B) Relaxed people.
(C) Take it slow people.

???

Since you say only people in group A expect competence, clearly insinuating that B and C people are not. Not really sure people would be happy about that.

To wit: I think this is unnecessary. If anything, such a thing will breed even more elitism and schism between players.

---

To be fair anyone who is okay with single pulls, zero dps healers and dps not AoEing by definition does not expect competence.

I'm aware this would further divide the players. I'm of the opinion that the divide is already essentially limitless, due in large part to the toxic casual mindset that unsolicited advice is equivalent to harassment.

That being said I think the Agressive/Circumspect/No Preference billing and descriptions put forth by Packetdancer is more in line with an ideal phrasing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kanjien

I can see all of the arguments here and all have some merit. As a new player and one who admittedly does not have the agility of most of the player base ( I am old, I admit it) I am grateful for the help I receive from most of the players I have encountered. I recently completed the Praetorium with a group that was very patient with me, even when I didn't get all the way on the elevator to find my suit of armor. In fact one of them actually came back for me. I know that may have been inconvenient to them and time consuming but I appreciate it very much. I wish I had caught the name of the person who came back for me to thank them personally but I did not.

---

You're lucky. The first time I did Praetorium I was killed and the group just left me there and didn't even bother to wait as I feverishly and confusedly trying to find my way forward, hahaha. I was really upset back then, and I admit, it colored my perspective on the FFXIV community for a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Veis_Alveare

due in large part to the toxic casual mindset that unsolicited advice is equivalent to harassment.

---

Can we leave the 'toxic casuals' and all that crap in the other half a dozen threads made about it. People suck on both sides, don't pretend like it's just Big Meanie Casuals ruining your fun when you were Very Nice to them. I have no idea why you and others feel the need to mention it in any divisive thread.

I also don't understand why everyone keeps saying they're against this because it's 'segregation'. Segregation is forced. In this hypothetical situation, you can choose which way you want to play. How is having more options to refine how you want to play segregation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doozer

Can we leave the 'toxic casuals' and all that crap in the other half a dozen threads made about it. People suck on both sides, don't pretend like it's just Big Meanie Casuals ruining your fun when you were Very Nice to them. I have no idea why you and others feel the need to mention it in any divisive thread.

I also don't understand why everyone keeps saying they're against this because it's 'segregation'. Segregation is forced. In this hypothetical situation, you can choose which way you want to play. How is having more options to refine how you want to play segregation?

---

If you don't see how it was specifically relevant to the post I responded to to mention toxic casuals I don't know what to tell you. If you want to keep dramatically oversimplifying everything and downplaying that issue though you'll fit right in around here I guess? Because yeah, all the conflict I've had in this game has been from people of that mindset.

Also like... it's quite literally separating people into groups which is quite literally the dictionary definition of segregation.

Quote:

---

the action or state of setting someone or something apart from other people or things or being set apart.

---

Granted it may not be forced but that's not really necessary for it to be segregation. It is, I just don't think that's a bad thing.