SGE/RPR feedback thread crosspost

[ForsakenRoe]

"It's a better SCH".

Then the issue is that we didn't actually get a new healer, we got 'a healer we already have, but with the clunk addressed', in which case, why did we need to add SGE, instead of just making SCH have less clunk in its kit directly?

Besides, if the prevailing opinion is 'it is a better SCH', that means that the opinion of SGE is now contingent on the opinion of SCH. So, if the opinion of SCH was 'it's god awful and needs to be deleted from the game', for example, then 'SGE is a better SCH' is not a high bar to clear. But we don't know what the prevailing opinion of SCH is because it wasn't asked, so now we have an equally nebulous 'opinion' of SGE that requires clarification, and likely isn't going to get any. So we've gone in a circle.

Also, I would argue that while only the people who hold stronger opinions would feel moved to write a comment, the accessibility of 'hey I agree with this, upvoted', literally a single click, means that up/downvoting things can be used as a fairly reliable metric of 'I agree/disagree with what was said here'. Sometimes people brigade the post and massvote it, but those instances are few and far between, not often enough to taint the concept. I see plenty of times where someone posts an idea on, say, the OSRS reddit, for a new minigame or skill training method, and if it's trash bad, it gets downvoted, and if it's good it gets upvoted. I don't recall seeing something that was undeniably bad design get upvoted, for example. And OSRS is one of the most 'I don't want any changes to my 25 year old game' games there is, so these suggestions get subjected to rigorous scrutiny on the regular