I appreciate your response. Disregard whoever this other person is commenting cause they are being disrespectful.

And listen I'm 100% on board with the BH strats being better - I never argued that. In fact, I agree whole heartedly that they are better - especially double tether which I think objectively fixes a ton of things. But I tried these in PF - and PF couldn't handle them. That entire day was lost with prog because nobody was on the same page about what strat was what and who was doing what. At the end of the day, it was a fact that objectively more prog was being hit just using the old strat.

What also made this worse was the lack of PF parties that exist at p4 and beyond. It already takes 4+ hours for a party to fill in PF on average and that party typically only lasts for 5-10 pulls at most before you have to repeat the whole process again. Splitting PF with 3 different strats this late in the stage would've only tripled the amount of time it took for PFs to fill and would've lead to 1-2 weeks of lost prog at a minimum for people to adjust. With only 4 weeks before next patch - this just isn't something that should be done when a strat is working for the vast majority of players who are actually getting close to clearing - *even* if the strats are objectively better (which I again agree that they are).

Again it's not that  "I've been progging 100 hours with this strat I don't want to go back."

It's "If this change is made, it will not just be going back but potentially risking my entire likelihood of clearing because it will split PF and cause confusion among parties"

I am fine with adjusting/changing/etc. for better strats. However, BH was a mechanic that PF has largely struggled with and are rarely consistent with. And, from my experience, the main reasons I saw with people wiping parties in PF was not due to the reasons that the strats were trying to solve - they were due to sheer lack of execution and understanding of the mechanic. This was a mechanic that largely would've have suffered by adding additional strats - because the basic fundamentals people were largely failing at executing would have been exponentially amplified if multiple competing ways to solve it were thrown in the mix. The amount of parties that I got into the past few days that didn't read PF descrip and then go "o wait...what strats are we doing? O the Mit sheet change? What are we doing? Send me a link, give me a second to review it" and that the next 2 hours is spent wiping to the beginning of black hole with a bunch of "o shit sorry muscle memory kicked in and I was doing the old strat again"

Again - when yall changed to stomp to use the new N/S stomp - most everyone I know loved it and it has been widely adopted among the PF. This illustrates people are fine with change if they deem it as something that helps prog.

The issue was specifically with BH with the things I mentioned above. It's easily the hardest pain point of the entire fight for pf - even worse than forsaken. And for this reason people were abject to making changes to it.

While yes people largely voiced opinions in a negative, disrespectful way - the crux of what they were getting at was what I am saying here but that they largely weren't able to communicate that in a healthy manner. If enough people are complaining about something it's again not due to people not wanting a better strat - it's that it's been proven to stall their progress entirely - which again, at the mid point of a patch is not something anyone wants to deal with. Most PFers who are at p3 and beyond are trying to clear on patch. They aren't viewing things in a "this fight is around forever, I can do it whenever". If that were the case, they wouldn't be sitting in PF nonstop trying to clear before the end of july.

It's a well known fact that people only become vocal about things when they go wrong - it's much more rare for someone to voice things when things are going smoothly and they are happy about something. For every change where people voiced negative opinions, think about all the times people didn't say anything about a specific change - that should clue you into that most people are fine with change if it actually helps to accelerate their prog from the point at which it's at now and the trade offs of relearning a strat outweigh the prog loss. Unfortunately, changing BH would've have been an amount of prog loss that just wasn't worth it to relearn a new strat because again BH has been the real pain point for PF - atleast from my experience.

Ill end all of this with saying I do appreciate you and everyone else that took the time to offer us resources that would help us and to compile things together in this way. I really do not want to minimize the efforts you all have put into this or detract away from the idea that I am not thankful - I am, and I truly mean that.

I just think in the future, there needs to be a more accepting line of communication with PF and there needs to be some sort of way that we can achieve trying new strats while also listening to PF and accepting the things that they settle on - even if they are worse strats. For better or for worse, at the end of the day "better" is relative and most of PF is going to see things differently from how you and the committy sees things. And even someone like me who thinks the strats were "better", I also am one of one the ones that believes it would have slowed my prog far more than it would have helped it because I had experienced how it wrecked PF for several days and and I basically lost entire days worth of prog because of it.

Anyways, thank you again for your response and for the things you have done, even if we do not see eye to eye. I hope everyone can come away from all of this learning things that will help communication on both ends and I hope in the future things can be handled in ways that works for everyone.