You must log in or register to comment.
The male-hunter female gatherer dichotomy is an anthropological myth used to reinforce gender stereotypes.
Interesting read, still leaves a lot of stuff unanswered but some aspects were crazy, like when they said that they found remains buried with weapons and just assumed it was a male, until someone looked at the bones and found the opposite. Like isn’t that your job to check things before making assumptions?
The field of Anthropology has gone through some WILDLY problematic periods. So-called “scientific racism” is a big one but shallow assumptions about historical cultures based on current-day social norms was very common.
This explains the rough student-teacher ratios out there. /s
90% of 40 player raids are absolute nightmares. This is not right.
But imagine if you grew up with and struggled alongside those 40 plays for your whole life.
That’s the maximum, not the amount that usually works. My car can go 120mph in the right conditions. Doesn’t mean it’s a good idea.
Fair, but I think the analogy is closer to saying like “a car can go 120mph.” But also my reply was a bit tongue-in-cheek as evidenced by the fact that I pulled the 90% number out of nothing more than my anecdotal feeling.
But if we are going to take this post seriously, I find it highly suspect as WoW never even had any serious content where more than 40 players are acting simultaneously. And if the limit is 50, they would have had to have data even higher than that. Im not sure how they could collect such data when you would only have 40 players you put in a raid. Maybe for things where multiple raids try to work together? But then youre putting two groups that dont normally play together and comparing them to one that has been hand selected to be cohesive. Doesnt really make sense.
Agreed. The sweet spot was ten man raids. You know everyone is pulling their weight. With 40 half the raid was slacking since those bosses didn’t need a lot of coordination.
I think the 20man mythic is the perfect place when you add in game balance considerations.
15 player original UBRS was where it was at
I agree, 10 was the most fun I ever had raiding in WoW by a long shot for a multitude of reasons.
FFXIV added 24 player hard raids called “chaotic raids” that’s absolutely a nightmare. They have a few 48 player raids that are more midcore content that works well, but 24 is super common and works well for other casual content. But most midcore/hardcore raids are 8 player, and that feels like a good spot.
Yeah I did the 8man raids, loved them. Kind of miss doing them
7.2 comes out in a week. New 8 player raids are dropping and people will be doing them and the savage versions for the next 3-4 months! Come on back!
Just came by to say hello and kudos to WoW players. Raiding has been most fun part of the game for me (the “interact with humans” part, story and lore aside)
OOP never played raid finder.
bro has clearly never played an AV pug
Which version? Alterac changed so many times you can’t really make that statement. Some were ok for pugs, some were idiotic.
The original 40 man AV
Edit: I haven’t played anything past cataclysm btw, no idea what changes were made
I absolutely agree, og AV was a pain in the dick. I played as a rogue though so I just ignored chat and ganked squishies.
Hehe yeah, I played rogue in the fresh classic release, peak gameplay. Ended up quitting due to the economy though unfortunately; Don’t wanna spend real life money on gold to buy the consumables needed to stand a chance in both pve and pvp.
And also don’t fancy competing for devilsaurs against people who literally have no life hahah
Is this actually legit?
Yeah, World of Warcraft is a real thing
Robin Dunbar, an anthropologist, found a relationship between primate brain size and average social group size, and extrapolated that to humans, giving a comfortable group size of around 150 people, known as Dunbar’s number. If you work on the principal that that would be about the average size of a tribe in an unstressed hunter society, it would seem quite pkausible that a hunting group would be around 50 people. It’s large enough to take down pretty much anything you’d want to hunt, and small enough to coordinate efficiently.
And it followed into some human culture. Certain Amish groups split up when their population approaches that number.
That makes sense, it keeps communities small enough to be cohesive but large enough to function, and spreads the groups to mitigate risks.
As far as i know, it was typically around 100 - 120 people and before i knew that i read somewhere that around 100 is the number of relationships the brain can handle.
It’s a fairly nebulous number, it’s going to be different for each individual, and Dunbar was only positing an approximate relationship between brain size and group size. Even if humans can manage 150 or more relationships, it makes sense to keep your group smaller than that to allow for external relationships too.
deleted by creator
