Curse

guildwars hero22 · Apr 08, 2008, 11:48 PM // 23:48

yes give back to those who are loyal remove loot scalling!

Creeping Carl · Apr 08, 2008, 11:54 PM // 23:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fay Vert

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

blah blah blah

The earth is larger than the moon.

Werent you whining earlier about how people were resorting to insults instead of discussing the points? And yet this is what you do when someone types out a well thought out reply with a point by point argument?

Amazing.

Dr Strangelove · Apr 09, 2008, 12:51 AM // 00:51

This thread is ridiculous. I could make a poll saying "Given the recent wave of penguin migrations near Antarctic research stations, should loot scaling be removed?", and I guarantee everyone would vote yes.

Cab Tastic · Apr 09, 2008, 01:25 AM // 01:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

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...

Try this link

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm#factors

It takes less of a sample size than you would think to get an indication of public opinion.

Oh and please stick to the debate instead of criticising forum members spelling. Thats pretty low.

Arv X · Apr 09, 2008, 02:50 AM // 02:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cab Tastic

Try this link

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm#factors

It takes less of a sample size than you would think to get an indication of public opinion.

Oh and please stick to the debate instead of criticising forum members spelling. Thats pretty low.

its not about the sample size, its about the sample targeting.

Guru is FAR from a random sampling, you couldn't get a random sampling from guru if you tried. There is also something to be said for the ppl who vote on the poll without reading more than 5 words of the first post.

MoriaOrc · Apr 09, 2008, 03:28 AM // 03:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cab Tastic

Try this link

http://www.surveysystem.com/sscalc.htm#factors

It takes less of a sample size than you would think to get an indication of public opinion.

Oh and please stick to the debate instead of criticising forum members spelling. Thats pretty low.

The sample size isn't a concern any more for this pole, certainly. I think cebrali was pointing out that a sample of 30 (side note: this was the "magic number" I was given in my high school stats class as well) would be sufficient to generalize to the entire GW player base (around 1 million people).

There is still the huge problem that a self-selecting sample presents. Basically any poll on Guru can be disregarded because the average forum-goer is so different from the average player.

manitoba1073 · Apr 09, 2008, 04:25 AM // 04:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

1) Of course Anet allowed fewer than 8 players in a zone. That doesn't mean then they were designing Fissure of Woe that they were intending it be be runnable by a single medic. Stop suggesting that Anet designed their game to be solo'd. Your logic fails at every turn. They're perfectly justified in closing the loophole in their game (or partially closing it as they did).

They listened to what players liked, and compromised on it by creating LS. You all would rather keep exploiting their game rather than have any kind of compromise. And here you are over a year later STILL unable to accept it.

2) Huh? Everyone can make nice money nowadays. Some people on that thread posted crazy amounts, but I'm mostly referring to the folks that are making 15k-25k per hour CURRENTLY. So you see? With this kind of income there's no need to remove, LS.

And holy crap, you say you could have made 3 MILLION this weekend? And you still want LS removed? You completely just killed your own argument, lol.

3) You merely speculate about what will be in GW2. My speculation is that they will make multi-character zones challenging enough to require multiple characters. I guarantee you they're not designing the game right now thinking "hmm... let's make this elite area REALLY hard - unless someone brings this one build then they can destroy everything in sight and get rich insanely quick".

I simple stated Anet suggested people play the way they wanted to not how you precieve people should play the game. If you cant handle that I'm sure JR has some hankies and tissues for you. SInce its obvious not a game for you that people should be allowed to play how they want just cause you seem to think its not fair. I bet Witte's guide to full Tyria solo really pisses you off then since its a full campaign that gets soloed.

I gave and still give plenty of comprimises. I suggest you go read some of the post that where made prior to inscriptions and the first LS thread. The only one not comprising is you. And no Anet didnt listen to players or they wouldnt have implemented LS in the first place.

Apparently once again you failed to read most posts. As most of those people are not making that much not even close. But if you would like to see what it does take to make that I'll be more than happy to show you. Im free all weekend here, Expect to farm about 48 hours so be rdy.

Me making 3 million in one weekend is not the same as a majority making it. As Ive clearly said before Im a hardcore player. And ofcourse I want it removed, I prefer people have the chances to actually get rewarded for each of there own different playstyles.

Ill let you think Im only speculating on GW2. Though Ill give you a little clue. You're close on the multi character zones. However it'll still be done similar in the way of WoW.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

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

Shouldn't that take 3 months or so?

That depends on your playstyle on how long it takes. Nothing more and nothing less.

[QUOTE=Creeping Carl]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loviatar

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.

Funny nowhere did I ever say I was poor. Ofcourse me and the presear bunny have a few things in common.

The only ones hanging themselves are you.

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

So answer points 1 and 2 then? Please... address this.

First of all, since you made an elementary factual mistake which proved that you're not competent enough to discuss the issue, you've already lost.

Second, you're making a logical fallacy as well. Let me rephrase the discussion in less abstract terms so that even you might understand the point.

You: I want a cat!
Me: Did you know that cat is a mammal?
You: You don't know anything, dogs, horses and frogs are mammals.
Me: Frog is an amphibian.
You: But cats are not dogs or horses, address this.
Me: *sigh*

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 05:23 AM // 05:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

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.

Invalid assumption #1. I am not anti-LS, and just a couple of posts before that I wrote "I don't hate LS, it doesn't have anything to do with my income. I'm just here to helpfully analyse the situation. In fact I'm supporting LS."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

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.

Invalid assumption #2. Most of my income doesn't come from farming. Although it would be technically possible to farm at that rate, it's way too hardcore an option for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

As I've and others have been saying, the motivation for wanting LS removed is purely insane greed and selfishness. A million per week is chump change and still you demand more?

Invalid assumption #3. People who know me tend to say that I'm one of the most generous and altruistic persons they know. Specifically I'm not demanding more, my current income level is completely adequate and just a consequence of the fact that there's not much else to do in the game any more, and I'm constantly giving away everything that I don't need for the completion of the remaining objectives. Once they are finished as well, I'll give away everything because I'm an ascetic by nature.

Three strikes, you lost.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

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

What can I say? Many people fail at reading comprehension.

Edit: corrected some typos

Cab Tastic · Apr 09, 2008, 05:29 AM // 05:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoriaOrc

The sample size isn't a concern any more for this pole, certainly. I think cebrali was pointing out that a sample of 30 (side note: this was the "magic number" I was given in my high school stats class as well) would be sufficient to generalize to the entire GW player base (around 1 million people).

There is still the huge problem that a self-selecting sample presents. Basically any poll on Guru can be disregarded because the average forum-goer is so different from the average player.

Yes, I understand that I was simply making the point that you don't necessarily need a huge sample to get reasonably accurate results within 5% or so.
As to GW Guru player make up. It is indeed likely to be made up of the more enthusiastic player types. But to trash a poll that is so conclusive is just silly. In my opinion it does indicate the strength of feeling against LS of the semi hard core and upwards.

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 05:34 AM // 05:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by MoriaOrc

There is still the huge problem that a self-selecting sample presents. Basically any poll on Guru can be disregarded because the average forum-goer is so different from the average player.

QFT

Everybody should understand that guru polls that are not about forum issues like default background color, are strictly of entertainment value, and hence the logical choice is cake

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 05:39 AM // 05:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cab Tastic

In my opinion it does indicate the strength of feeling against LS of the semi hard core and upwards.

Yes, as pointed out in my analysis a couple of pages ago, it is a rational choice for the middle class to oppose LS. However, it is just as rational a choice for the casual portion of the population to support LS. There may not be much strength of feeling or even awareness of the issue in that part of the player base but strong feelings should not be the main driving force of political decisions.

Creeping Carl · Apr 09, 2008, 06:30 AM // 06:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

*snipped because of length*
Three strikes, you lost.

What can I say? Many people fail at reading comprehension.

Edit: corrected some typos

You know, you can backpedal and throw out disclaimers all you want, your arguments are entirely anti LS in nature and your claim that you are indeed pro LS is bull. I think you only say that to somehow "legitimize" your arguments to make it look like you have no personal agenda here.

So don't throw that "you people fail at reading comprehension" bull at us. It really doesnt matter though, the main thing is that some of us disagree with your arguments no matter what side you claim to be on.

But here are some of your supposed pro LS posts. One calling pro_LS players communists and the other claiming that LS removes choice to farm and that removing LS would be better for the game.

So tell me, lacking reading comprehension and all, how does that sound like a person in support of LS rather than a person against the removal of LS?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

And this, right here, reveals the pathological side of communism in a very succint way. If I'm not earning insane amounts of money then nobody else should either. Down with the choice! Down with opportunities! Down with capitalist elitist pigs! Down with wealth, make everybody as poor as I am.

It always amazes me that when there's a choice of advancing opportunities and wealth, or repression and poverty, there's a substantial number of people who choose the latter.

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.

Victim? Who, me? Did you even read what I wrote? My current - sustainable - average income is a bit over 100k per day, thank you very much, and it is fully sufficient for what I want to do before GW2 comes out. Loot Scaling doesn't have any effect on my game experience, so your weak attempt at dismissing my point not only misses the mark, it never even finds the general direction

I'm not whining. I'm not demanding that LS should be removed. I'm just pointing out inconsistencies and odd ideological constructs that people use to forward their agenda.

Gee, if you really are in support of LS, I'd hate to see what you'd say if you wanted it removed.

Fril Estelin · Apr 09, 2008, 06:46 AM // 06:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

So don't throw that "you people fail at reading comprehension" bull at us.

I think the hypocrisy of your reply works against you and your arguments (because the truth value of words is not only dependent on the word but the one who write them). You have a very limited understanding of what tmakinen is trying to say. I was here from the beginning and read his posts with huge interest and it was clear that he was trying to sort out facts from fiction, rather than take a clear-cut position. You understood it differently, and that's your right, but don't defend non-sense positions like this (everyone can say "no that's not what you meant, I know better than you what you meant"). I felt I'd rather come in his (her) support than have this continue, given he's (she's) contributed greatly to this thread.

BTW it's very easy to make an online poll lie about its results. If I were mad, I could easily give 500 votes to the option 2 by using different accounts and IPs (I've seen it done many, many times) And don't forget that GWG is probably no more than 1% of the GW population, this is a very tiny and specific part of the community (GW is about clicking on the screen or typing in the chat, not typing in a forum

).

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 06:57 AM // 06:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Creeping Carl

So tell me, lacking reading comprehension and all, how does that sound like a person in support of LS rather than a person against the removal of LS?

(underlining mine)

ROFLMAO!

Thanks for the best laugh of the day by proving my argument in a most charming way.

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 06:59 AM // 06:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

First of all, since you made an elementary factual mistake which proved that you're not competent enough to discuss the issue, you've already lost.

Second, you're making a logical fallacy as well. Let me rephrase the discussion in less abstract terms so that even you might understand the point.

You: I want a cat!
Me: Did you know that cat is a mammal?
You: You don't know anything, dogs, horses and frogs are mammals.
Me: Frog is an amphibian.
You: But cats are not dogs or horses, address this.
Me: *sigh*

You: You guys are acting like communists.

Me: Except your comparison fails to be relevant here in such a basic way that it's utter nonsense.

You: Yes but since you said "communal ownership" and not "communal ownership of means of production", a technical point wasn't accurate and therefore nobody has any business confronting you for your inane babble about communism.

Me: Okay my bad, but still please justify how you can still label things as communist despite it's main pillars not applying in any way.

You: No I'm not going to do it.

Creeping Carl · Apr 09, 2008, 07:06 AM // 07:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

I think the hypocrisy of your reply works against you and your arguments (because the truth value of words is not only dependent on the word but the one who write them). You have a very limited understanding of what tmakinen is trying to say. I was here from the beginning and read his posts with huge interest and it was clear that he was trying to sort out facts from fiction, rather than take a clear-cut position. You understood it differently, and that's your right, but don't defend non-sense positions like this (everyone can say "no that's not what you meant, I know better than you what you meant"). I felt I'd rather come in his (her) support than have this continue, given he's (she's) contributed greatly to this thread.

BTW it's very easy to make an online poll lie about its results. If I were mad, I could easily give 500 votes to the option 2 by using different accounts and IPs (I've seen it done many, many times) And don't forget that GWG is probably no more than 1% of the GW population, this is a very tiny and specific part of the community (GW is about clicking on the screen or typing in the chat, not typing in a forum

).

Oh I understand what he's been saying alright and I disagreed with a huge chunk of it, no matter what side he's supposedly arguing for. But when faced with disagreement with his points, his defense is that he has no personal agenda because he supposedly is in support of the very thing he's been arguing against.

And in the meantime, he's free to portray everyone else as anti-capitalist communists while screaming at everyone that he's been misunderstood and everyone fails at reading comprehension. I don't expect everyone to have a clear cut position but when your arguments lean to one side more than the other then you have to ask yourself, which side of the issue am I really arguing for?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmakinen

(underlining mine)

ROFLMAO!

Thanks for the best laugh of the day by proving my argument in a most charming way.

Proving that you continually sidestep and backpedal and distract with inane responses?

tmakinen · Apr 09, 2008, 07:09 AM // 07:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by cebalrai

No I'm not going to do it.

From the premises:

(1) cats are mammals
(2) dogs are mammals

does not follow that cats are dogs. Since your position is so fundamentally flawed, there's no point in discussing it. There's overall no point in discussing with people who are unable to grasp the basic mechanisms of rational thought, other than for git and shiggles, and I've already gotten my laughs for today

MoriaOrc · Apr 09, 2008, 07:12 AM // 07:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cab Tastic

Yes, I understand that I was simply making the point that you don't necessarily need a huge sample to get reasonably accurate results within 5% or so.

In fact, according to your calculator, the "30 people" magic number would be more then enough to generalize a poll with this strong of a one-sided result to the entire GWG/Riverside population (assuming the results are accurate, more on that below).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cab Tastic

As to GW Guru player make up. It is indeed likely to be made up of the more enthusiastic player types. But to trash a poll that is so conclusive is just silly. In my opinion it does indicate the strength of feeling against LS of the semi hard core and upwards.

Agreed. The standard forum-goer probably consists of most of the ultra high end/rich/very hardcore types, a good chunk of the semi-hardcore types, and a tiny fraction of the casual base. The thing none of us can say is, how much of the GW population is the semi-hardcore and up, and how much is casual. Without that information, we can't say how important this poll is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

BTW it's very easy to make an online poll lie about its results. If I were mad, I could easily give 500 votes to the option 2 by using different accounts and IPs (I've seen it done many, many times)

Of course we hadn't even got into this yet. I think the people arguing that the pole actually represents the GW player base need a good long read of the standard Slashdot poll disclaimer:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slashdot Poll Disclaimer

This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.

Also, tmakinen, I think anyone who just picked this up from the last couple pages could have made an honest mistake about your position. You were criticizing some one of the more out-there pro-LS people, and got drawn into an argument about those comments. It might have made you seem like you were against LS if someone was just picking up (or wasn't paying attention to who said what earlier). Your analysis and data has been really helpful, and you've been one of the best all-around contributors to this thread. Keep up the good work, and consider just letting this drop.

cebalrai · Apr 09, 2008, 07:14 AM // 07:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by manitoba1073

I simple stated Anet suggested people play the way they wanted to not how you precieve people should play the game. If you cant handle that I'm sure JR has some hankies and tissues for you. SInce its obvious not a game for you that people should be allowed to play how they want just cause you seem to think its not fair. I bet Witte's guide to full Tyria solo really pisses you off then since its a full campaign that gets soloed.

I don't care anything about how people like to play. I'm saying that Anet is justified in putting some limits on things in the game when something starts happening that's not their intent.

Anet has said that you can still solo farm. They just don't want there to be such a huge gap (up to 8X wealth production) between it in other playing styles.

Makes sense to me.