Well by class at least..

ive been on lately and have seen that im not at lvl or whatnot to join any groups on the lfm panel even the ones that im in the correct lvl range for..so.. i figured shit. this broken ass fucking game just has more broken ass shit.. no biggie..

But then my guildie told me that these faggots had warlock removed from the lfm for joining. I look through all the lfms and sure as shit.. almost half of them are excluding warlock from joining. Even ones where the person who put the lfm up was a warlock. I thought it may be a glitch but half of those lfms have warlock available.. so idk wtf is going on.

As Mr Reilly said.
Many believe that Warlock auras cause the lag - especially when there is more than one in a group.

Pretty sure I read on other forums that warlock was broke in lfms. It was auto excluded probably an oversight on turbine part. If somebody wants warlocks in group when posting lfm they have to add it themselves.

PersonaNonGrata wrote on Apr 28^th, 2016 at 8:25pm:

There are an easy dozen foolish conspiracy theories about what causes lag.  They are all wrong.

Warlocks don't cause lag.  Companions don't cause lag.  Barbarians don't cause lag.  Hirelings don't cause lag.  Etc.

Poor coding causes lag.  Bad VM configuration causes lag.  Poor network throughput causes lag.

Skrilla wrote on Apr 28^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:

You are not well-acquainted with (or probably even aware of the existence of) logic, are you? If the bolded part is true, then the most likely is not the italicized part. Sure, there may be a bug in certain limited instances, but when roughly half the LFMs are accepting of warlocks, then that would indicate most of the rest of the party leaders intentionally excluded warlock (rather than a bug causing their exclusion).

Spoon wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 10:35am:


Great second post.

nowAvaultie wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 11:37am:


It's about what you're willing to accept at face value.  It's about the narrative you will default to believing instead of taking the time to explore alternative explanations.

Where do you get the figure "half" of all LFMs?  Did you double-check it in-game, did you ask a leader with an LFM posted excluding Warlocks why they did it?  Or did you see it said and just repeat it mindlessly?  What makes you think "half" of all players posting LFMs intentionally excluding Warlocks sounds like a logical explanation?  At face value, its preposterous. 

But if you choose to naively accept it you can say things like "My LFMs are open to Warlocks" and feel like you're much more enlightened than other players, implicitly assuming other players are actively excluding Warlocks.  You can paint the poor Warlocks (bonus points if you play a Warlock) as victims of other people's narrowmindedness.   

Since you've got your head lodged up there firmly, I'll spell it out for you.  There is a bug in the game.  If you make a "Public Group" the game will replace the Warlock icon with the Epic Icon.  This doesnt happen if you make a "Private Group."  It's a bug so blindingly obvious that it takes all of two minutes to figure out and go in the game to confirm.  Then, seeing a load of LFMs that don't list Warlocks makes a shit-ton of sense, those are all Public Groups where the leader wasn't aware of the bug.  But instead of taking the time to fully explore option #2, you double-downed on option #1.  Logic...get acquainted with it.

Spoon wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 1:19pm:

Now, if you'd actually looked at the bolded parts that I quoted, you'd have seen that's where I got the "half of all LFMs". And I turned off the "Public Group" option the day they released that and haven't thought about it since. No one that joins my groups ever has that on as far as I can tell. I say that because, if I recall correctly, it annoys the group leader with a pop-up asking if they want to post a public lfm. And I haven't seen that pop-up in years. So, yeah, I wasn't in a position to consider the "Public Group" option as the source of the bug since I'd forgotten that even existed. However, it makes sense that Turbine failed to update that since they, too, either forgot it exists or have chosen to ignore it (depending on how much malice you wish to ascribe to them). I'm actually surprised to see there are that many people using the "Public Group" option based on the OP's information.

Dullknife wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 1:29pm:

LMAO, nice!

Skrilla wrote on Apr 28^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:


Click to join on them anyway, then you'll see if they really hate you.

Frank wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 1:23am:


I didn't say I subscribe to it.
If it were just one or two things, then it would have been solved and isolated by now.
The spinning blades seem to be a trigger in more cases than average.  So the coding and calcs behind this when combined with other factors, cause people to think it is the root cause, when it is likely just a symptom.
I think auras fall into a similar category, where observation bias plays a role.  Auras would generate many calcs particularly in large groups, but because the lag is not always present, there must be other contributing factors.

Like you I suspect the coding patches and short cuts over time are the main issue and why they can't fix it easily.

Daggertooth wrote on Apr 29^th, 2016 at 8:21pm:


As explained in my post above, I don't think it is Warlocks causing the lags because to test that would be simple.  Prevent all warlocks playing for a day and see if lag disappears.  It won't.

I was answering the OP about the perception that Warlocks cause lag. There is a perception and that influences some members of the playerbase.

Warlocks being the most recent class done by this crew (who couldn't debug a "Hello World" batch), is probably buggy to all shit, so I have no doubt it contributes in some way, but it is not the root cause.

Dark_Helmet wrote on Apr 30^th, 2016 at 1:38am:

Worse than useless.  Of the ~10-15 bug reports I've submitted a good third of them never even made it to Turbine for them to ignore.  You can park a lot of your report in your copy buffer for the cases where submission fails, but having to fill out a dozen fields and drop downs makes that a maddening process that even copy/paste doesn't speed up much.  So I gave it up as a bad idea.