FP+ is amazing

[DVCFan1994]

The point of employing "strategy" in touring = getting the "most" out of touring (i.e., maximum rides, especially headliners, with minimal waits). If someone is happy not getting the optimal number of headliner attractions with the minimal amount of wait, it doesn't make them "wrong." It just means they did not need to optimize their strategy to enjoy themselves. Just because someone enjoyed not getting to ride all the headliners with minimal waits doesn't make their touring style an optimal strategy. It just means they enjoyed themselves without employing an optimal strategy. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't equate to what they did being an optimal strategy. The determination of whether a strategy is optimal is an objective question. Does the strategy result in maximum rides with minimal waits? That's what makes an optimal strategy. The subjective question of "did someone enjoy their trip" has nothing to do with whether or not their strategy was an optimal one.

Excellently stated and the exact point I was trying to make.

We will have to agree to disagree. The definition of optimal I found was "most desirable or satisfactory." From Merriam Webster. You just aren't going to convince me that there is an objective answer to what is most desirable. What is most desirable to my family is entirely different to my sisters family, and different from thousands of other families. To have an optimal strategy for her family, i.e. go on rides her two year old is allowed, my kids would ride nothing they love. Which they chose to do the day we went to EP with them, because they were so excited to be with their cousin, and we'd already done EP another day on our own, without tiering. But, if we go with our optimal, her son would be able to ride nothing (at least using only 3 FPs).

To me there can not be one optimal strategy. But to me, that day was highly desirable, one could say optimal in my opinion. It began Watching my 5 & 7 year old be the big kids to their little cousin, enjoying rides with him. And it ended with a pitcher of Sangria at Via Napoli.

 

[ariel326]

meh.

I liked FP+. We utilized it more at MK and HS, then Epcot, but I still liked it overall.

We used it for Soarin We waited in line for Test Track for 45 minutes or so. We didn't mind waiting in line for Test Track since it was really the only thing there that we were going to wait in line for.

No biggie for us. For others who don't like to wait in line for anything, they may not like it as much.
Such is life.

 

[Mkrop]

Where is the Monster Inc playground in Epoct that Op mentions

 

[morethananyonex]

Where is the Monster Inc playground in Epoct that Op mentions

I think there's special playgrounds that are only around during Flower and Garden. Not sure though, never been for it.

 

[KaLyn]

Where is the Monster Inc playground in Epoct that Op mentions

Not sure where but I'm pretty sure it's up for the flower and garden festival only.

 

[msmileyface]

IDK... just seems like people find too much pleasure in questioning something that made someone happy

I agree, yikes... Too much negativity around here.

 

[Mkrop]

Not sure where but I'm pretty sure it's up for the flower and garden festival only.

Oh ok...thought I was going nuts

 

[magicbob]

We will have to agree to disagree. The definition of optimal I found was "most desirable or satisfactory." From Merriam Webster. You just aren't going to convince me that there is an objective answer to what is most desirable. What is most desirable to my family is entirely different to my sisters family, and different from thousands of other families. To have an optimal strategy for her family, i.e. go on rides her two year old is allowed, my kids would ride nothing they love. Which they chose to do the day we went to EP with them, because they were so excited to be with their cousin, and we'd already done EP another day on our own, without tiering. But, if we go with our optimal, her son would be able to ride nothing (at least using only 3 FPs).

To me there can not be one optimal strategy. But to me, that day was highly desirable, one could say optimal in my opinion. It began Watching my 5 & 7 year old be the big kids to their little cousin, enjoying rides with him. And it ended with a pitcher of Sangria at Via Napoli.

While your browsing Merriam Webster's, try looking at the other definition listed... "best or most effective." It all boils down to how you measure the effectiveness of a strategy.

Using your subjective definition, we might as well shut this board down and stop discussing strategies altogether because no one's idea of what constitutes an effective strategy will have any relevance to any other reader if the standard is "because I enjoyed myself."

There's no way to measure the "most effective strategy to have a good time." That's just too subjective. That's why measureable standards (# of rides, wait times, etc.) have to be the standard in objectively discussing whether a strategy is effective. We can measure the "most effective strategy to ride the most and wait the least."

This is the biggest disconnect in every FP+ discussion. It works well for some people. We all concede this point. But just because someone liked the system doesn't equate to it being the most effective strategy to maximize touring. It simply means that some people are content with a touring style that is not maximized. Again... there is nothing wrong with that.

But no matter how you spin it, "FP+ is awesome because we got to ride everything we wanted to" is not the same as "FP+ is awesome because it allowed to ride the most rides with the least waits."

 

[DisneyEG]

Glad it worked for you and the way you tour. It doesn't work for everybody.

Neither did the old fastpass

 

[mesaboy2]

Neither did the old fastpass

Of course not. I did not claim otherwise.

I will claim that the old FastPass gave everyone the same opportunity. FP+ in its current form definitely does not. Whether or not everyone knew of that opportunity or took advantage of it are different questions.

 

[magicbob]

Neither did the old fastpass

Legacy FP may not have "worked" for everyone, but there's no denying that an effective strategy using FP- made it possible to ride many rides with minimal waits if employed a certain way. After all, isn't that what many people have complained about... that certain "super-abusers" used the system too effectively?

Some people preferred not to use it that way. But that doesn't negate the fact that it could be used to optimize touring.

 

[lugnut33]

Glad OP liked FP, but the most crazy thing is using FP for Figment. If that doesn't prove something is wrong then nothing will.

 

[surferdave]

Neither did the old fastpass

It didn't please everybody, but it did always work. Nobody ever got a piece of paper out of the machine that said "We're sorry. A blip in the network kept us from retrieving your information. Please try again."

 

[mesaboy2]

Glad OP liked FP, but the most crazy thing is using FP for Figment. If that doesn't prove something is wrong then nothing will.

But using FP for Figment is precisely what made them happy and the experience awesome. So how can it be wrong, sub-optimal, or pointless?

To the posters who say all Tier/Group 2 selections at Epcot stink: yeah, but to varying degrees. Figment is at the very top of the Epcot Tier/Group 2 Stinkometer.

 

[lugnut33]

But using FP for Figment is precisely what made them happy and the experience awesome. So how can it be wrong, sub-optimal, or pointless?

To the posters who say all Tier/Group 2 selections at Epcot stink: yeah, but to varying degrees. Figment is at the very top of the Epcot Tier/Group 2 Stinkometer.

In no way was my comment directed at the OP and it wasn't meant to be derogatory. It was really made to point out how silly it is they even made FP available for Figment. It also shows just how lacking in attractions Epcot currently is.

 

[mesaboy2]

In no way was my comment directed at the OP and it wasn't meant to be derogatory. It was really made to point out how silly it is they even made FP available for Figment. It also shows just how lacking in attractions Epcot currently is.

I went to the trouble of making a little list to help people with FP decisions. They are free to use it, ignore it, or make fun of it to their heart's content. But I can't force anyone to read it.

 

[JimmyV]

You just aren't going to convince me that there is an objective answer to what is most desirable.

To me there can not be one optimal strategy.

You have to view it in terms of efficiency, not desireability. The term "sub-optimal" is more of a scientific term that implies the ability of being measured. What is most efficient may not be the most desireable, that is for sure. But as the weeks and months go on, people will ask here what are the best and most efficient uses of their FPs. That is an objective measure but one that can always be overridden by personal preference. If someone asked you if they should get a FP+ for TSM or Muppets, I'd bet that you'd have an objective answer as to the highest and best use of their FP. But ultimately, if the person loves the queue at TSM and actually enjoys the 80 minute wait, then the point is moot. In the end, using FPs at Epcot provides, at best, an array of mediocre options. It's hard to say that any one choice is better than any other.

 

[Planogirl]

IDK... just seems like people find too much pleasure in questioning something that made someone happy

People on both sides of the discussion are questioned. Those who claim to dislike FP+ are also quizzed and argued with and sometimes chastised.

The point is that the new system doesn't work well for everyone but does work well for some. I believe that the problem is figuring out how to use it and whether it's even worth dealing with if you are a particular type of traveler.

 

[WookieeFeet]

I'm planning on using FP+ for the first time next week and I can already tell It's going to be a headache. First and correct me if I'm wrong but you only get 3 FPs for ONE park per day? Seems like a step backwards to me.

Scenario - Day 1 MGM (HS)- it gives the option to choose 1 from "a" list and 2 from "b" list. The only attractions that would remotely require a FP in MGM are Hollywood Tower of Terror, Rockin Rollercoaster and Toy Story Mania. Problem is they are ALL on list "A". So you only get to choose 1

Day 2 - Epcot. Same thing "a" and "b". Soarin and Test Track are in "a" everything else give or take is "b"

Ok now the part that bugs me.

Magic Kingdom- choose 3 from this list. EVERY RIDE IN THE PARK. Including all 3 Mountains.. At the moment FP+ makes ZERO sense to me. Why can't I get FPs for the big hitters like I could with the paper ones last year???!! Bad move Mouse. Bad move.

 

[MrInfinity]

You just aren't going to convince me that there is an objective answer to what is most desirable. What is most desirable to my family is entirely different to my sisters family, and different from thousands of other families.

To me there can not be one optimal strategy. But to me, that day was highly desirable, one could say optimal in my opinion. It began Watching my 5 & 7 year old be the big kids to their little cousin, enjoying rides with him. And it ended with a pitcher of Sangria at Via Napoli.

I have to agree with DVCFan. An optimal strategy is not one that maximizes rides or minimizes wait times. I would say the most important factor in a "successful or good vacation" is simply the amount of fun you had. An optimal strategy is one that enables you to get the most enjoyable vacation for you and your family.

To some, shorter waits and more rides might be their measure of fun. But to most, family time, digging in the sand, sharing an ice cream, and going on a few rides will be the important parts. I remember some of my favorite times at WDW were simply enjoying an ice cream w my DD while I waited for other ppl to go on a ride.

If someone is happy not getting the optimal number of headliner attractions with the minimal amount of wait, it doesn't make them "wrong." It just means they did not need to optimize their strategy to enjoy themselves.

Um. No. A family that goes and chooses to optimize time building sand castles while they watch the fireworks from their resort instead of using that 9pm-11pm "optimal" slot for maximizing rides did not fail to optimize but yet be okay with it. They have optimized for themselves perfectly!!!

It just means they enjoyed themselves without employing an optimal strategy. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't equate to what they did being an optimal strategy.

If it was optimal for them who are you to say because they didn't do what would be optimal for you that they didn't do their own optimal strategy? This line you're taking is so strange. "I've identified *THIS* is the most optimal thing to get out of a Disney vacation. If you don't do *THIS*, it's ok, but you're being less than optimal"

Using your subjective definition, we might as well shut this board down and stop discussing strategies altogether because no one's idea of what constitutes an effective strategy will have any relevance to any other reader if the standard is "because I enjoyed myself."

Um no. This board brings together all these different strategies to be discussed and shared so each can learn from the others. One does not need to conclude on one single optimal strategy for the board to have merit.

That's why measureable standards (# of rides, wait times, etc.) have to be the standard in objectively discussing whether a strategy is effective. We can measure the "most effective strategy to ride the most and wait the least."

Again these measurements are just important to you. Just because it's important to you, and measureable, you suggest it should also be the "standard of an optimal trip" to everyone.

It simply means that some people are content with a touring style that is not maximized. Again... there is nothing wrong with that.

For us, FP+ allows us to enjoy a fully maximized touring style.

For example, since you like numbers. FP+ allows me to minimize the number of times I have to split from my family. There. Concrete number. With FP-, I split up from my family 3 times a day, and spent a good 45 minutes of each day without them, trekking across a park. Now with FP+, I won't do that at all. That is concrete savings for me.

You seem to be into "maximizing numbers at all costs". But specifically, maximizing those numbers that are important to you. That's fine, enjoy! But do remember it is your personal opinion and not a standard. Other people will want to maximize other aspects of their trip. Many will not even use the word "optimize" or "maximize" yet they will still make such decisions at every step of their trip.