Quote Originally Posted by Caurcas View Post
We have data that supports my point, but due to ToS we can't really discuss it.
Just because people perform at different levels doesn't make a run bad.

Someone could be new and performing badly, but accepting criticism and getting better each time. I'd call that a good run.

A group of top tier players could be arguing over strategy and getting multiple party members killed by trying to force their strategy. I'd call that a bad run.

Your data would call both of those runs bad.

Data is just numbers and facts. Given the nature of the tool, it will never have enough information to really tell the why's of things. It can't tell you if the poor performance was due to laziness, bad habits due to bad teachers in the past, ignorance due to be new, or other issues.

Given that no one else has come in claiming 50% of their runs are bad you are either:

1. Knowingly exaggerating for effect
2. Unknowingly exaggerating due to misremembering the total of bad vs neutral vs good runs - totally possible due to human memory

I'm choosing to believe you are under #2 and don't want admit that maybe your memory is faulty. Because I'd feel that anyone under #1 would have come clean by now on the exaggeration just to get people moving towards discussing the possible solutions to the problem.

My question is this:

Why are you so fixated on getting everyone to believe that so many players are bad rather than trying to get players focused on discussing possible solutions to reduce the number of bad players?

Because even I, who hasn't had anywhere near 50% bad runs, would agree that the game could do more to encourage players to learn their class and role. To increase the skill level of the average player.