Using this 'strong and weak' language you are using...
Look. It IS the sustainable option. If you have the strong grouped with the weak, then the weak can get through duties they wouldn't have been able to and, perhaps, learn through observation what the strong do and what makes them strong. Some won't learn, some will perform so badly that the run is impossible, some need to be taught during the run but their chances are better this way than not. All for an inconvenience -often minor outside of exacting circumstances- on the side of the strong. In the long run this results in more people playing, and more people getting better at what they're doing.
Meanwhile, if you group weak with weak, strong with strong, the strong will become a 'privileged' class who enjoy their 'good' fellows' company and flawless runs. But the weak? They would suffer - - there would be no role models do demonstrate how to be better (and look, as tank I can vouch that watching others tank had taught me a lot, same with a lot of people i know; don't dismiss this with 'bah people won't learn a thing!') and their duties would be far worse than they are now. They would clear far less often. You might end up watching dungeon runs take 40 minutes or more. Overall, their experience is going to be downright horrible and SE would lose a LOT of players with this. And there would be less people getting better, too.
Again, if you don't want to play with the rabble, do your roulettes as a premade. THAT is an option.
You're basically being outright elitist and newb-shaming at this point, even if indirectly. I can't help but understand now why your Novice Network doesn't seem to welcome you (given your frequent complaints insinuating such); people like these end up being ostracised / disliked in my server's Novice Network too. (It is, after all, a Novice Network; it's the least appropriate place for one to shame novices for being novices)


Reply With Quote

