Curse

The Herbalizer · Aug 07, 2007, 08:22 PM // 20:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

I am completely affected both positively and negatively if/when this change were to occured. Didnt i mention that already?

i will repeat. AGAIN.

I have weighed the positive and negative effects (including on myself) and i have come to the conclusion that the positive effects outweigh the negative.

I have a few rare Tyrian/Canthan items and i dont mind sacrificing them if it meant better items for everyone else.

OMG you just did the hitler. LOL. Ok...ok...ok, let me clarify.

Theres nothing LOGICALLY wrong with an opinion since opinions do not require any logic. An opinion can be MORALLY or ETHICALLY wrong, but we're not talking about morality or ethics, since that is not the issue being debated.

So what if i ignored it. The point was given already. And since there was no counterpoint against it, theres no reason to return to that point.

I completely believe it is inevitable. So whats your point?

You seem to think that telling me that im biased and my opinion is biased etc etc is discussing the topic. It is not. Thats merely discussing me. As much as i love your attention, i must digress.

Im being productive since i am DEFENDING my position. Thats part of debate.

By cutting down your nonesense and showing that you arent arguing with me, just wasting my time.

The only person who has done any counter-argument to me is Snow Bunny.

I can easily negate your argument by pointing out that what you state is based on personal tastes and does not reflect the actual possible outcome.

I know a LOT of players who prefer Factions and Prophecies skins to any Nightfall skins (with few exceptions) and would certainly appreciate usable versions of rare skinned weapons (Ornate Shield for me!)

I would certainly say its true that certain items are only highly valued purely on their rarity. As such, even if the inscribable system were added, they would still be higher in value since they are still rare, inscription or not.

The inscription system does not affect how easily it is to get a rare weapon. Merely that all rare weapons can become more easily useable.

The only thing that truly depreciated inscribable items was really the introduction of Hardmode and finding specific farm areas for rare items (Dead sword, Dead Bow and Colossal scimitar come to mind).

I think, that it would be hard for you to argue that items being actually valued for their use....is a bad thing.

Yes there is value in a weapon's aesthetics, but i dont see how you can argue that thats the only purpose of a weapon.

Rare pretty weapons will always be rare and pretty, regardless of inscriptions. Same with rare ugly weapons.

Its value might depreciate, but that shouldnt stop you if you really like the skin or its rarity or its functionality.

if player A can cause more damage per swing than player B, player A has an advantage. if player A can have both -2 while enchanted and -2 while in stance, while player B cannot craft such a shield, player A has an advantage.

Its really that simple. What player B has to do to overcome player A does NOT negate the fact that player A still has an inherent advantage.

There really is no advantage if a player thinks they can slap a 20/20 sundering and +30Hp on their unconditional weapon and they will get an advantage over players with no unconditional weapons.

For exmaple, a guildie a long time ago tested every single enemy in Tyria and recorded what elemental damage they are weak against. Therefore surely in pve weapons with every elemental option would be useful for when encountering enemies weak against it.

Then there are the slaying mods which can also deal additional damage. A barrage ranger with skeleton slaying mod and dealing holy damage (courtesy of smite monk) in fow a while back was ftw.

Energy heavy builds would benefit from zealous.

Ebony elemental mods are good in pvp against players not resistant to elemental damage.

Just a brief browse of guildwiki's build section shows that many builds for pvp require several different weapons. Ebony, zealous and vampiric seem to be the favourite.

Any serious pvper using an unconditional weapon would therefore seem to be severely handicapping themself.

Yes 15% is better than 15>50 by itself but any player using just one weapon in pvp is handicapping themself. There are multiple situations in pvp and one weapon cannot possibly cover them all.

lyra_song · Aug 07, 2007, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Herbalizer

There really is no advantage if a player thinks they can slap a 20/20 sundering and +30Hp on their unconditional weapon and they will get an advantage over players with no unconditional weapons.

For exmaple, a guildie a long time ago tested every single enemy in Tyria and recorded what elemental damage they are weak against. Therefore surely in pve weapons with every elemental option would be useful for when encountering enemies weak against it.

Then there are the slaying mods which can also deal additional damage. A barrage ranger with skeleton slaying mod and dealing holy damage (courtesy of smite monk) in fow a while back was ftw.

Energy heavy builds would benefit from zealous.

Ebony elemental mods are good in pvp against players not resistant to elemental damage.

Just a brief browse of guildwiki's build section shows that many builds for pvp require several different weapons. Ebony, zealous and vampiric seem to be the favourite.

Any serious pvper using an unconditional weapon would therefore seem to be severely handicapping themself.

Yes 15% is better than 15>50 by itself but any player using just one weapon in pvp is handicapping themself. There are multiple situations in pvp and one weapon cannot possibly cover them all.

It is true, that one weapon cannot cover all pvp situations.

And it is also true that an unconditional damage weapon is not guranteed victory.

You can tap dance around with build specific weaponry all you want.

But.

This STILL does not negate the unconditional damage as an inherent advantage.

Two characters with identical class, build, stats and skills with only 1 difference being that one has an unconditional damage weapon and the other having a conditional damage, which one is inherently better?

If you had to choose between two warriors, equal in all cases except one has a 15^50 and the other has 15% unconditional, which would you pick?

Even if the conditional damage was built around the skillbar, theres no guaranty that those conditions will be met, while unconditional damage is unconditional damage, period.

Its an imbalance, no matter how much you try to play with it, or view it from other perspectives.

boko · Aug 07, 2007, 08:37 PM // 20:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

OMG you just did the hitler. LOL. Ok...ok...ok, let me clarify.

Theres nothing LOGICALLY wrong with an opinion since opinions do not require any logic. An opinion can be MORALLY or ETHICALLY wrong, but we're not talking about morality or ethics, since that is not the issue being debated.
.

I am sorry if I had to resort to that one but this confirms my thoughts. If someone is going to debate with me about opinions being universally right, tell me that even that one particular person I used as an example is not wrong, then I have no doubt anymore. You are only twisting and turning deperately trying to prove that you are right when you are wrong. I would have to resort to even more crude examples just to prove you wrong, but I am not going to go there.

Opinions are thoughts about a matter or argument. You are going to tell me that never once have you thought about something and got it wrong? Than let me congratulate you... for your arrogance and narrow-mindedness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

So what if i ignored it. The point was given already. And since there was no counterpoint against it, theres no reason to return to that point.

I completely believe it is inevitable. So whats your point?.

My point is simple. It was a direct response to your post. Was it not you that asked me if I did not read your post? Selective memory yet again?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

You seem to think that telling me that im biased and my opinion is biased etc etc is discussing the topic. It is not. Thats merely discussing me. As much as i love your attention, i must digress.

Err...the fact that your opinion is biased means that it does not account for everyone's benefit.

Yes. coz maybe we should just consider all biased argument and all opinion of every GW player and add them into consideration? What next?

How about we consider only opinions that have seen all the perpectives instead? Isn't it better than a biased opinion of someone who only want what he sees?

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Im being productive since i am DEFENDING my position. Thats part of debate.

You are being productive by putting words in my mouth and imagining things? Pretending that I did not answer your point, and defending yourself by pretending that oh ...I am being unproductive? and slandering me? Nice way of being productive. OR did I corner you so much that you dun't have anything else to say and have to resort to that?

On this, I take my leave, I dun't see the point of discussing with someone pretending they want to discuss when all they do when proven wrong is to try to play on sematicsm, and turn and turn to try and get the last word. Discussing with someone who thinks that his opinions cannot be wrong is completely stupid and senseless.

MithranArkanere · Aug 07, 2007, 08:47 PM // 20:47

There is one main reason to do so.

GW:EN is not a separate campaing. It's an expansion. Expansion increase, modify and extend old content.

How could you explain that you get non-inscribed drops, walk 300 metters into far shiverpeaks... and incriptions start to drop...

And you get inscribed items in rystal Overlook... get teleported 100 meters... and poof, no more inscribed drops.

Inscriptions, like insignia, became CORE.

Would you like being able to get core skills in GW:EN and Nightfall only, but getting them out of Factions and Tyrian lists?

Eh... nope.

makosi · Aug 07, 2007, 08:57 PM // 20:57

Boko, you're going nowhere with what you've just said by having personal digs at Lyra and avoiding the topic at hand. Admit defeat, I did. I accepted the whole 20<50 + 15>50 as being better than +15% [uncondtional] but I've since changed my mind. I was naive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Herbalizer

There really is no advantage if a player thinks they can slap a 20/20 sundering and +30Hp on their unconditional weapon and they will get an advantage over players with no unconditional weapons.

Suppose a player has 3 unconditional +15% axes: one Zealous, one Ebon, and one Sundercrap. You can't possibly argue that this is fair for opponents becuase they cannot replicate it with a pvp character nor with a pve character (without a hell of a lot of luck and many stacks of ectos).

The advantage to the wielder of the undconditionals is negligible and would probably go unnoticed to the opposition but that isn't the point. I don't even care if they're nerfed or not.

lyra_song · Aug 07, 2007, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by boko

I am sorry if I had to resort to that one but this confirms my thoughts. If someone is going to debate with me about opinions being universally right, tell me that even that one particular person I used as an example is not wrong, then I have no doubt anymore. You are only twisting and turning deperately trying to prove that you are wrong when you are wrong. I would have to resort to even more crude examples just to prove you wrong, but I am not going to go there.

Opinions are thoughts about a matter or argument. You are going to tell me that never once have you thought about something and got it wrong? Than let me congratulate you... for your arrogance and narrow-mindedness.

LOL. You continue to attack me and have yet to counter my points about the subject at hand.

Quote:

My point is simple. It was a direct response to your post. Was it not you that asked me if I did not read your post? Selective memory yet again?

Actually i have poor memory. But the idea of making both inscribable and non-inscribables was brought up and although very interesting, its one possibility that doesnt outweigh the benefits of going all out and going completely inscription based.

Quote:

Err...the fact that your opinion is biased means that it does not account for everyone's benefit.

Yes. coz maybe we should just consider all biased argument and all opinion of every GW player and add them into consideration? What next?

How about we consider only opinions that have seen all the perpectives instead? Isn't it better than a biased opinion of someone who only want what he sees?

My bias is my bias. It merely states the side i choose to argue for. It does not take away or negate my points, which are still valid.

Quote:

You are being productive by putting words in my mouth and imagining things? Pretending that I did not answer your point, and defending yourself by pretending that oh ...I am being unproductive? and slandering me? Nice way of being productive.

On this, I take my leave, I dun't see the point of discussing with someone pretending they want to discuss when all they do when proven wrong is to try to play on sematicsm, and turn and turn to try and get the last word. Discussing with someone who thinks that his opinions cannot be wrong is completely stupid and senseless.

Pointing out your opponents mistakes in a debate is a perfectly legitimate tactic.

Since we are arguing about inscriptions, and you keep arguing about me, ill keep pointing it out until you get back on topic.

Since you never addressed the issues I brought up in favor of, unlike Herbalizer, or Snow Bunny. or manitoba, or lifeinfusion, i do not consider our conversation anything more than a waste of time. All youve done is try to point out that my bias is somehow a negative towards my points, my points which are built on analyzing the positive and negative effects for ALL players.

If you want to counter me, dig into my analysis and come up with an opposite conclusion that is just as solid.

You can tell me im narrowminded, but im not arguing for ALL sides, im arguing for only one. Thats not being narrowminded. I chose a side and im sticking with it. Ive already explored the other points of views, hence why i chose this side, hence why i have my bias. I think this is the best side. And i will try to prove it.

Loviatar · Aug 07, 2007, 09:21 PM // 21:21

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boko

Err...the fact that your opinion is biased means that it does not account for everyone's benefit.

and protecting a very small exclusive nitch of players at the expence of taking away additional fun for the vast majority of players improves the game somehow?

how precicely would this restriction help most of the players?

Quote:

How about we consider only opinions that have seen all the perpectives instead? Isn't it better than a biased opinion of someone who only want what he sees?

and are you claiming to have studied this from all angles and having done so are arguing (without any personal bias yourself) that expanding inscriables all over would be bad for most players?

Quote:

Discussing with someone who thinks that his opinions cannot be wrong is completely stupid and senseless.

obviously you think that you yourself cannot be wrong to be able to say she is wrong with such complete assurance

boko · Aug 07, 2007, 09:21 PM // 21:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by makosi

Boko, you're going nowhere with what you've just said by having personal digs at Lyra and avoiding the topic at hand. Admit defeat, I did. I accepted the whole 20<50 + 15>50 as being better than +15% [uncondtional] but I've since changed my mind. I was naive.

I have nothing agains Lyra in person. I on the contrary did admire her/his stance in another thread. But my post was clear at 1st, it's Lyra who is derailing the direction by discussing about ...opinions?! Twisting and turning and playing on sematics to avoid my point.

Since I already know that this is probably going to be going on forever, and before this get too personal, I prefer to stop here. Already said so before you posted

. No point in discussing with someone who isn't willing to.

boko · Aug 07, 2007, 09:29 PM // 21:29

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

and protecting a very small exclusive nitch of players at the expence of taking away additional fun for the vast majority of players improves the game somehow?

how precicely would this restriction help most of the players?

Maybe that's why I am vouching for a middle ground? O.o

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

and are you claiming to have studied this from all angles and having done so are arguing (without any personal bias yourself) that expanding inscriables all over would be bad for most players??

Yes. Because in my suggestion, no one is left behind or given the cold shoulder. When did I said that expanding inscribables would be bad for most player?

[QUOTE=Loviatar]

Quote:

obviously you think that you yourself cannot be wrong to be able to say she is wrong with such complete assurance

Oh. I can be wrong, but then point it to me. Never did I say that my opinion was abolutely right. It's a certain other person who is doing that. What he/she is doing instead is trying to play on sematics and pretend that an opinion cannot be wrong at all instead, thus turning the discussion round and round. I am not interesting in playing cats and mouse.

Hyper Cutter · Aug 07, 2007, 09:35 PM // 21:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

An inscription system would ruin the beauty of these weapons.

No, it wouldn't.

maraxusofk · Aug 07, 2007, 09:39 PM // 21:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by TabascoSauce

We're so competitive as a society and world that evidently, people do not like to see others being successful. It has worked its way in here, and these nutjobs are crying that "OMG Sky Falling! Our precious achievement engine is being GIVEN AWAY!" Uh, no, there are not a limited number of anything in this game, and your real milk will still be in your real fridge when all is said and done.

Lets discuss this aspect in real life. mercedes used to be a highly desired object because it represented wealth. from 2004?-2005? they lowered their c class cars dramatically to the 30k range. at the same time, u can see the demand for mercedes c class drop dramatically. why? BECAUSE ACQUIRING THE CAR BECAME EASIER.

like real life, if everything in guild wars was made easy, nobody would demand it. if u make items easy to acquire, nobody would really want it after a while, and one would only succeed in alienating the existing fan base. if u really want a particualr tyrian skin inscirptable, u can go and buy it cheap. a req 9 long sword inscirptable sells for 5-10k, whereas a tyrian one sells for 50k. u DONT need to retroactively change wut is already uninscriptable. all items can drop inscirptable from hoh. if u want, i can probably find u a inscriptable version for any skin.

I really dont see why everyone wants to retroactively change all uninscribable items into inscribable. it isnt expensive to buy a max dmg inscribable item with a tyrian skin. would it not be a good compromise to merely change the drops to be inscribable, but keep wut isnt inscribable as is? i really dont understand all these one sided demands.

wuts hard to get will remain hard to get and everyoen else can get the skins they want.

ShadowsRequiem · Aug 07, 2007, 09:41 PM // 21:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by lyra_song

Proof of an imbalanced and broken system.

If a PvE player can gain an item that could be advantageous in PvP, and cannot be gained through the PvP item creation system, it creates an imbalance of PvE vs PvP characters.

This would be equal to when the Lieutenant's helm didnt exist as a PvP item.

For reason of imbalance alone, you have illustrated a perfect reason why the system needs to be changed.

(I already know someone will say "Oh but pvp character can buy it, the Lieutenant's helm cannot be traded", that point is moot, since that doesnt invalidate the inequality.)

If you could plz read, you'd see in my other post I say the system would work if they made extra inscriptions.

MithranArkanere · Aug 07, 2007, 09:44 PM // 21:44

maraxusofk, we already discarded the 'because getting things would be easier'.

Rare skin will stay rare. And you can alrady get almost anything by crafting and collectors.

Inscriptons do not make stuff easier to get, make some of the stuff you get more versatile.

ShadowsRequiem · Aug 07, 2007, 10:02 PM // 22:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr Strangelove

It's bulls*** because of the insane rarity of such items. Anyone who's actually played the game knows that the items you two mention don't drop with any sort of frequency. In 2000 hours of play, I've gotten only one usable, noninscribable caster weapon from a drop. Your wonderful random system seems to prefer to produce healing prayers foci with 18% HCT water magic and +10 armor vs. charr.

Anyway, I'd probably avoid mentioning that items found in prophecies can be better than those available to PvP characters if I were you.

hmmm me thinks you failed your reading tests....

If you could actually take the time to look at other posts I say this inscription system would work if they made MORE inscriptions. This way there are not "rare" items as you say that people cannot create.

When did I say items in proph can be better then pvp? I said I personally favor the drops I have gotten in the first two games as opposed to the ones I have gotten in NF. The only worth while drop I ever got in NF was an Elemental sword drop. Compared to several crystalline drops in proph.

However if you remember there was a time when superior items were availible in proph..

makosi · Aug 07, 2007, 10:10 PM // 22:10

If they were to introduce an inscription system, which is possible, it would definitely not be retroactive and would not alter current weapons. It would be like the chest at the end of The Deep/Urgoz' Warren except on a larger scale.

If the Hall's chest and the elite missions' chests could be added to the game without affecting past weapons then it could happen to all chests (and monster loot) if that's what they dev team decided to do.

Applying inscriptions to existing non-inscribables would prove a logistical nightmare because of:

1) -1 energy and health regeneration damage mods,
2) Unconditionals
3) Dual reduction shields
4) Multi-profession staves/wands/focus-items

There are probably even more but the above list of Tyiran/Canthan possibilites cannot be replicated under the Nightfall inscription system.

maraxusofk · Aug 07, 2007, 10:11 PM // 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by MithranArkanere

Rare skin will stay rare. And you can alrady get almost anything by crafting and collectors.

Inscriptons do not make stuff easier to get, make some of the stuff you get more versatile.

How is getting an imperfect item, then modding it to 15>50 not making things easier to get? are u honestly telling me that recieving a tyrian 15>50 is easier to do than adding a 15>50 mod to an item?

and um no, rare skin will not stay valuable. a tyrian crystalline sells for several times more than an inscirptable crystalline. is that called retaining value if u change the tyrian to inscriptable? even a fellblade 15>%0 tyrian sells more than an inscriptable one. are u saying that just because an item has a rare skin it has precisely the same value?

the logic behind the "rare skin staying rare" is basically the equivalent of having ur porche carrera gt replaced by a porche carerra 911. both are porchese (rare skin), but they clearly have vastly different values.

The Herbalizer · Aug 07, 2007, 10:24 PM // 22:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by makosi

If they were to introduce an inscription system, which is possible, it would definitely not be retroactive and would not alter current weapons. It would be like the chest at the end of The Deep/Urgoz' Warren except on a larger scale.

If the Hall's chest and the elite missions' chests could be added to the game without affecting past weapons then it could happen to all chests (and monster loot) if that's what they dev team decided to do.

Applying inscriptions to existing non-inscribables would prove a logistical nightmare because of:

1) -1 energy and health regeneration damage mods,
2) Unconditionals
3) Dual reduction shields
4) Multi-profession staves/wands/focus-items

There are probably even more but the above list of Tyiran/Canthan possibilites cannot be replicated under the Nightfall inscription system.

I mentioned this before but the post I think got deleted.

A big big problem for PVP could be caused by retroactive inscriptions.

There is or at least was widely used monk builds in GVG which only used monk skills. The player could switch the secondary to warrior and put the free attribute points into tactics. Thus allowing the player to gain the full benefits offered by a R7 shield.

Dual modded perfect R7 shields sell for 150e + with even the least desirable of skins.

Even if inscriptions were added the number of R7 shields available at all is reasonably limited and would/could offer PVP players a nice advantage.

The use of R7 shields currently in high level GVG has occurred as two members of Team Quitter have owned R7 shields.

The shields altough expensive are not out of the reach of too many players. They have already been used in GVG and will continue to be. These are more of a threat to GVG than unconditional weapons have ever or will ever be.

makosi · Aug 07, 2007, 10:40 PM // 22:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Herbalizer

The shields altough expensive are not out of the reach of too many players. They have already been used in GVG and will continue to be. These are more of a threat to GVG than unconditional weapons have ever or will ever be.

I agree completely. Req.7 shields are a bigger imbalance in PvP than unconditionals but the case I'm arguing is whether unconditionals are imbalanced or not. The extent to which these items are imbalanced is not really important in the context of this argument.

Personally I don't care about the unconditionals and req.7s because I'm the biggest PvE carebear out there. My facial expression wouldn't change if Anet nerfed either the req.7 shields or unconditionals.

A PvP character cannot create a max req.7 shield nor an unconditional +15% damage weapon therefore I believe these items to be imbalanced, however petty the difference is.

TabascoSauce · Aug 07, 2007, 10:46 PM // 22:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Alright. Well...
This post doesn't address the actual topic in the slightest. You're just saying that people are debating over pixels. On that assumption you might as well say that we might not debate over money because we're all going to die anyway.
Crap argument

No, it is very relevant, and you do not want to see the point. If we were talking about duplicating say, corn, then we could feed the world endlessly. That will never happen because the element of physicality that constrains what we can and cannot do here in reality does not permit that. In-game, once the object is created in 3d modeling software there is a zero production cost.

If your in-game character dies, he gets reset to his last city zone. We as actual people do not. If your in-game character needs cash. then you can farm for it indefinitely. We as players cannot - we must sleep, eat, and do other various biological functions, as well as play GW.

There is a clear demarcated difference between reality and this game. The word you and I are both specifically talking about is "scarcity".

Scarcity is artificial in-game, ANet can set it however they want.

What I am saying is that since scarcity is artificial, all your arguments about "irreparable economic harm" or "making rare/valuable items common" is entirely artificial in the first place. Currency and loot in GW is created by a randomizer algorithm and never runs out, never stops. Every kill = % chance for loot. There will never be a time when the Cliffs of Dohjok are not filled with new spawns.

If ANet continually tweaks economic values in an attempt to make the game fairer, then we have clear precedent to make changes.

What the OP was talking about was exactly such a change.

I assume we can agree that this change will have beneficiaries and, to borrow a synonym of your side's terms, victims?

Lyra is clearly trying to debate with you about who and what will be winners and losers, I am merely reminding you and anyone else reading this thread that virtual =/= real. Stop trying to portray yourselves as suffering - the milk will still be in your fridge when all is said and done, either way.

Thanks!
TabascoSauce

silvershock · Aug 07, 2007, 10:47 PM // 22:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jumping Is Uselss

Personally I have lots of perfect Tyrian weapons, I would not mind if all weapons in GW were turned into inscriptable. The way I see it, there is no difference between a max dmg perfect Tyrian weapon with a max dmg perfect inscriptable weapon. Both will do the same amount of dmg if there stats are the same.

It's a prestige thing. Tyrian weapons with 15^50 are a lot more rare than nightfall 1s. normally i would agree with keeping things the way they r, but i don't really care 2 if they made all weapons inscripable.