Curse

MithranArkanere · Apr 08, 2008, 06:38 PM // 18:38

Ursan is the MOST 'for everyone' skill in the whole game and the LESS solo one.
A single ursan is just monster bait. Ursan require parties.

It could be even more by ignoreing character's profession, but that's for another thread.

They do not want to prevent peope from getting real cash, just to prevet SOME people from getting it doing something solo and without trading with other players.

I added the wiki link to the explanation they gave for LS when they added it, an explanation that is still valid. Just seadch and read it again. If you don't agree with it, read it again. And again and again until either you understand it or your eyes bleed.

'Casual farming'? I was talking about NORMAL PLAYING.
That is: Making quests, missions, hm missions, vanquish, etc.

Can't you take out 'farming' of you mind?

Creeping Carl · Apr 08, 2008, 06:38 PM // 18:38

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

hi Carl

DONT FORGET THIS

a million a week is CURRENT income not counting the super hoard of wealth already accumulated over the years from all those farming exploits before Anet started closing them.

as i said it is a totally money/greed MINDSET that does not even recognize it is a complete abnormalityfrom the supermajority playerbase who bought a GAME and are playing it for fun not GW:TYCOON

Heya Loviatar

Yes, I forgot about the already accumulated super hoard of wealth which make its even more mind blowingly ridiculous that they can stand on their piles of treasure and still yell about how poor they are.

It's hilarious though, that they just couldnt help themselves by slipping up and bragging how much they're making and giving themselves more rope to hang themselves with.

Mr.Bimble · Apr 08, 2008, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Remove loot scaling,bring back farming.....

MithranArkanere · Apr 08, 2008, 06:43 PM // 18:43

At least I hope that all of you know that no matte how right you think you are, they are not removing LS.

Malice Black · Apr 08, 2008, 07:01 PM // 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

At least I hope that all of you know that no matte how right you think you are, they are not removing LS.

This is true.

Stop complaining about being poor and actually play the damn game.

Creeping Carl · Apr 08, 2008, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr.Bimble

Remove loot scaling,bring back farming.....

When you anti-LS people are bragging about your million per week income, I don't see how you can shamelessly proclaim that farming is dead.

reetkever · Apr 08, 2008, 07:08 PM // 19:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Ursan is the MOST 'for everyone' skill in the whole game and the LESS solo one.
A single ursan is just monster bait. Ursan require parties.

It could be even more by ignoreing character's profession, but that's for another thread.

They do not want to prevent peope from getting real cash, just to prevet SOME people from getting it doing something solo and without trading with other players.

I added the wiki link to the explanation they gave for LS when they added it, an explanation that is still valid. Just seadch and read it again. If you don't agree with it, read it again. And again and again until either you understand it or your eyes bleed.

'Casual farming'? I was talking about NORMAL PLAYING.
That is: Making quests, missions, hm missions, vanquish, etc.

Can't you take out 'farming' of you mind?

Casual farming is the farming done by Casual Players. It is the party of NORMAL playing, because without farming, nobody is able to do anything except storyline. Sure, there are some people that are doing the game for the first few weeks that are happy with the storyline alone, but after these weeks the storyline becomes old. Besides, there are LOADS of things to do (Even after alot of the stuff being nerfed), and the storyline is just a little part of 'the real game'. You can't expect casual players to do the same storyline over and over again. Everyone wants to do other fun stuff if they have the choice.

The difference between Hardcore farmers and casual farmers is that hardcore farmers aim to become rich, while casual farmers don't care about how rich they are, as long as they can do fun stuff. Oh, and I'm not sure if you claimed that Ursan is a skill for everyone, but it is clearly not.

Ursan is one of these skills that requires 1337ness to work. If you don't have rank 9 or 10, you won't be getting any parties with it. And tell me, how does one that only plays a few hours a day and does NOT waste their time farming for Norn points all the time get rank 9 or 10?

And even IF they managed to get it, finding a good party would still mean trouble, and the farm run itself is not profitable for the regular gamer, since no direct cash comes from it.

tmakinen · Apr 08, 2008, 07:10 PM // 19:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

It's hilarious though, that they just couldnt help themselves by slipping up and bragging how much they're making and giving themselves more rope to hang themselves with.

What is the most hilarious thing here is that you are so out cold in this discussion that you don't even understand that I am not asking for LS to be removed. I have expressed this very clearly and many times over in the last couple of pages but no matter how many times I repeat it, it doesn't seem to register on planet C-Carl, whichever imaginary orbit it happens to be occupying.

Since you can't even see where different parties are standing concerning the issue much less understand their arguments, you're just contributing background noise here. The same goes for Loviatar.

Loviatar · Apr 08, 2008, 07:30 PM // 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

What is the most hilarious thing here is that you are so out cold in this discussion that you don't even understand that I am not asking for LS to be removed. I have expressed this very clearly and many times over in the last couple of pages but no matter how many times I repeat it, it doesn't seem to register on planet C-Carl, whichever imaginary orbit it happens to be occupying.

Since you can't even see where different parties are standing concerning the issue much less understand their arguments, you're just contributing background noise here. The same goes for Loviatar.

i never stated your position on LS so i did not misunderstand it either.

my statement was that as poor as you claim to be you are in the very stratospheric high end even if you are poor compared to the top 50 richest.

you are not against LS i understand .

that you consider yourself poor while being in the top of the tiniest fraction of the playerbase is to me simply uncomprehensible.

and no, having started in early beta and played ever since casually i am not poor.

i have not only everything i need but everything i WANT as well.

i have spent less than 4k since wintersday having fun in all 3 noob areas having fun giving FREE help

i play for fun not profit.

Creeping Carl · Apr 08, 2008, 07:30 PM // 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

What is the most hilarious thing here is that you are so out cold in this discussion that you don't even understand that I am not asking for LS to be removed. I have expressed this very clearly and many times over in the last couple of pages but no matter how many times I repeat it, it doesn't seem to register on planet C-Carl, whichever imaginary orbit it happens to be occupying.

Since you can't even see where different parties are standing concerning the issue much less understand their arguments, you're just contributing background noise here. The same goes for Loviatar.

Reading your past few dozen posts, it's clear that you're not pro LS, at least, your posts sure don't reflect it. You've said that LS makes everyone too poor and severely limits options. And you've called pro LS people communists. And there are plenty of your posts that are anti-LS in nature.

So gee, you might not be asking for LS to be removed in so many words but you sure arent pro LS. Either that or you're severely confused about what your stance is. Heck, here's one of your "I'm not against LS" posts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

Do you see how you contradict yourself there? Without LS you have the choice of (1) either playing 'normally' and easily getting everything that you need to complete a campaign, or (2) farming or (3) trading for better income to get some vanity items. LS makes farming a non-option, ergo, it removes choice. Removing LS wouldn't force anybody to farm gold to be able to complete the game, claiming that is just silly. It would force people to do some work for vanity items, though. You don't want people to have a choice of doing something more profitable than you do, and that's fine and dandy. Just be aware what it is called.

So excuse me if me and others supposedly mistook you as an anti-LS fanatic.

Cab Tastic · Apr 08, 2008, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

I have well over a million gold in the bank, half a dozen sets of 15k armor, and a lot of other swank loot.

And I've never solo farmed a day in my life.

See how utterly ignorant you look when you assume things? You lost all your credit right there IMO.

why do you always insult people when your reasoning fails?

Fril Estelin · Apr 08, 2008, 09:14 PM // 21:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

Reading your past few dozen posts, it's clear that you're not pro LS, at least, your posts sure don't reflect it. You've said that LS makes everyone too poor and severely limits options. And you've called pro LS people communists. And there are plenty of your posts that are anti-LS in nature.

So gee, you might not be asking for LS to be removed in so many words but you sure arent pro LS. Either that or you're severely confused about what your stance is. Heck, here's one of your "I'm not against LS" posts.

This was a very GeorgeBush-esque moment you gave us: You're either with us, or against us

Phineas · Apr 08, 2008, 09:35 PM // 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Isn't a million enough to get an obsidian set?

Shouldn't that take 3 months or so?

Not in your idealistic world

...

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phineas

Seems like some players want GW to be like a communist society where every player is identical. The first person to do or get something automatically qualifies every other player for the same thing.

Sounds great.

Where do we have to sign?

cebalrai · Apr 08, 2008, 09:47 PM // 21:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

If you had a shred of competence to discuss the issue you'd know that it's common ownership of means of production. Since every player owns all the necessary means of production (a character and its equipment), you conclusively fail.

So answer points 1 and 2 then?

Nobody is suggesting there should be a classless society or lack of social mobility. You make a million gold per week and nobody's complaining that it's not fair that everyone doesnt make even close to that.

Please... address this.

Creeping Carl · Apr 08, 2008, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

This was a very GeorgeBush-esque moment you gave us: You're either with us, or against us

That's bull. All I did was point out how confusing it was to guess what his stance was especially in a big thread like this and especially since all his posts point to him being the opposite of what he claims to be.

Nice try though. Keep on trolling.

EDIT: And judging by all the posts responding to him, I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Fay Vert · Apr 08, 2008, 09:54 PM // 21:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Forums aren't real good indicators of playerbases.

I know that that isn't your point, just merely pointing that out for others advocating that this forum represents the Guild Wars playerbase.

yes I am fully aware of the limitation of forum polls to represent opinion, which is precisely why I used the word indicative. Polls are indicative, but only indicative.

The real question is how representative they are, to determine this you need two things, you need a large enough sample size and you need a representative demographic mix. Well, statisticians generally regard sample sizes of 30 or more as being good enough to do mathematical (probablistic) calculations on so we are alright there. The tricky one is how representative the demographic is. Is there something about the forum population that could scew the results.

Well, GW is an online game, so there is no technology block. You have to be able to read, as the age rating for GW is teen, this shouldn't be a problem but I know there are many younger players, which although able to read would not visit a site full of text, not sure what proportion that is of players. Finally there is the very casual player that has no interest other than playing the game itself. This may well be the thing that makes the poll unrepresentative, although the poll is anonymous, so lurker friendly, it can't really represent the true demographic of GW players.

However, just because the results may be scewed doesn't make them invalid. Any scew will have a percentage bias on the results, it would take a monstrously massive scew to overturn a 70% to13% opinion.

So although the poll is almost certainly not representative it is very indicative.

Phineas · Apr 08, 2008, 10:07 PM // 22:07

Should the cake lovers be excluded when looking at the actual for's and againt's? Making it more like 83% to 16% (at time of writing)

Fay Vert · Apr 08, 2008, 10:45 PM // 22:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phineas

Should the cake lovers be excluded when looking at the actual for's and againt's? Making it more like 83% to 16% (at time of writing)

Well actually, it would make more sense if you excluded the minority votes and kept the cake lovers, that would be a slightly closer thing at 81% against LS to 19% cake lovers.

cebalrai · Apr 08, 2008, 11:26 PM // 23:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

yes I am fully aware of the limitation of forum polls to represent opinion, which is precisely why I used the word indicative. Polls are indicative, but only indicative.

The real question is how representative they are, to determine this you need two things, you need a large enough sample size and you need a representative demographic mix. Well, statisticians generally regard sample sizes of 30 or more as being good enough to do mathematical (probablistic) calculations on so we are alright there. The tricky one is how representative the demographic is. Is there something about the forum population that could scew the results.

Well, GW is an online game, so there is no technology block. You have to be able to read, as the age rating for GW is teen, this shouldn't be a problem but I know there are many younger players, which although able to read would not visit a site full of text, not sure what proportion that is of players. Finally there is the very casual player that has no interest other than playing the game itself. This may well be the thing that makes the poll unrepresentative, although the poll is anonymous, so lurker friendly, it can't really represent the true demographic of GW players.

However, just because the results may be scewed doesn't make them invalid. Any scew will have a percentage bias on the results, it would take a monstrously massive scew to overturn a 70% to13% opinion.

So although the poll is almost certainly not representative it is very indicative.

The above post is utter ignorance. You're just making things up. Total fabrication.

Where to begin picking this whopper apart?

1) A sample size of 30 or more? Statisticians? Huh? The minimum sample size necessary for validity is a function of how large the group is that's being polled. 30 may be a good enough sample size to measure 80 people. But is it large enough to accurately measure a group of 3,000? 300,000? 3 million? Absolutely not!

2) Back to the question of who is voting... It's people that read, and quite possibly post on forums. This is a tiny subset of GW players, not a representative sample across the board. Obviously .001% of GW players are coming here and voting, otherwise we'd have hundreds of thousands of votes on each side.

How many casual (read: don't play/care much) players read forums? How many oblivious new players are here?

How many uber-hour highly invested players are here? Who's more likely to show up here on this bitter, hostile thread (and vote): a new player, a very infrequent player, a female player, young players, or the 25+ hour per week gold farmer?

Unless you're getting a proportional cross-section of all these groups (and more), then this poll is completely invalid horse puckey.

3) It would not take a "monstrous skew" to overturn 70 to 13 voting. All it takes is polling heavily within one tiny subset that fits a certain profile and you get this invalid bunk.

4) Your logic is utter failure when you admit that the poll doesn't represent GW players and then say the results are still meaningful. You're basically saying "okay, so the poll doesn't mean anything, but it still tells us everything we want to know."

You say "this poll is not representative, but it is indicative". All it's indicative of is that 69% of a tiny, non-representative segment of people have a certain opinion.

What the fark? Your logic is atrocious.

PS - You're misusing the term "skew". You can't even spell it. "Indicative" isn't used appropriately either. And for the love of Lyssa, "probablistic" isn't a word...

Fay Vert · Apr 08, 2008, 11:47 PM // 23:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

blah blah blah

The earth is larger than the moon.