urgthock wrote:
Noaani wrote:Andok wrote:This is off topic, but the following gave me a good laugh: Noaani wrote:Part quotes and taking quotes out of context = fail. How ironic: Noaani wrote:Andok wrote:Quoting me on something I never wrote speaks volumes about you and your argument.A lot of people that frequent these forums know that I like to cut back on my quoting. I will often remove a chain quote down to the individual response that I am making a comment about.The theory is, people reading my post would have read the posts before it, and thus already know the argument at hand. At times it is easier to sum up a quoted post than to leave the whole thing in place, and at times it is worth doing so for comical effect.This was the case with the quote from you.Rest assured though, people reading my comment to you should be aware of what points you were making, even I don't have enough respect for them to prevent me ammusing myself (and maybe others) at your expense. I guess this also speaks volumes about your consistencey Say anything in order to win, right?Quoting the paragraph of a post you are responding too is not the same as quoting a portion of a sentance, taking it out of context, and then turning it around to mean something different.Interestingly though, you just went and took two unrelated posts and tried to use them together to prove a point. That is not really helping you with anything, as the only thing you prove is that your actual on topic argument is weak at best.Seems to me like you did it again.Andok wrote:Say anything in order to win, right?I don't think anyone expected you to actually say "oops, yea you got me". But many others can see it even if you can't.
Noaani wrote:
Andok wrote:This is off topic, but the following gave me a good laugh: Noaani wrote:Part quotes and taking quotes out of context = fail. How ironic: Noaani wrote:Andok wrote:Quoting me on something I never wrote speaks volumes about you and your argument.A lot of people that frequent these forums know that I like to cut back on my quoting. I will often remove a chain quote down to the individual response that I am making a comment about.The theory is, people reading my post would have read the posts before it, and thus already know the argument at hand. At times it is easier to sum up a quoted post than to leave the whole thing in place, and at times it is worth doing so for comical effect.This was the case with the quote from you.Rest assured though, people reading my comment to you should be aware of what points you were making, even I don't have enough respect for them to prevent me ammusing myself (and maybe others) at your expense. I guess this also speaks volumes about your consistencey Say anything in order to win, right?Quoting the paragraph of a post you are responding too is not the same as quoting a portion of a sentance, taking it out of context, and then turning it around to mean something different.Interestingly though, you just went and took two unrelated posts and tried to use them together to prove a point. That is not really helping you with anything, as the only thing you prove is that your actual on topic argument is weak at best.
Andok wrote:
This is off topic, but the following gave me a good laugh: Noaani wrote:Part quotes and taking quotes out of context = fail. How ironic: Noaani wrote:Andok wrote:Quoting me on something I never wrote speaks volumes about you and your argument.A lot of people that frequent these forums know that I like to cut back on my quoting. I will often remove a chain quote down to the individual response that I am making a comment about.The theory is, people reading my post would have read the posts before it, and thus already know the argument at hand. At times it is easier to sum up a quoted post than to leave the whole thing in place, and at times it is worth doing so for comical effect.This was the case with the quote from you.Rest assured though, people reading my comment to you should be aware of what points you were making, even I don't have enough respect for them to prevent me ammusing myself (and maybe others) at your expense. I guess this also speaks volumes about your consistencey Say anything in order to win, right?
This is off topic, but the following gave me a good laugh:
Part quotes and taking quotes out of context = fail.
How ironic:
Andok wrote:Quoting me on something I never wrote speaks volumes about you and your argument.A lot of people that frequent these forums know that I like to cut back on my quoting. I will often remove a chain quote down to the individual response that I am making a comment about.The theory is, people reading my post would have read the posts before it, and thus already know the argument at hand. At times it is easier to sum up a quoted post than to leave the whole thing in place, and at times it is worth doing so for comical effect.This was the case with the quote from you.Rest assured though, people reading my comment to you should be aware of what points you were making, even I don't have enough respect for them to prevent me ammusing myself (and maybe others) at your expense.
Quoting me on something I never wrote speaks volumes about you and your argument.
A lot of people that frequent these forums know that I like to cut back on my quoting. I will often remove a chain quote down to the individual response that I am making a comment about.
The theory is, people reading my post would have read the posts before it, and thus already know the argument at hand. At times it is easier to sum up a quoted post than to leave the whole thing in place, and at times it is worth doing so for comical effect.
This was the case with the quote from you.
Rest assured though, people reading my comment to you should be aware of what points you were making, even I don't have enough respect for them to prevent me ammusing myself (and maybe others) at your expense.
I guess this also speaks volumes about your consistencey Say anything in order to win, right?
Quoting the paragraph of a post you are responding too is not the same as quoting a portion of a sentance, taking it out of context, and then turning it around to mean something different.
Interestingly though, you just went and took two unrelated posts and tried to use them together to prove a point. That is not really helping you with anything, as the only thing you prove is that your actual on topic argument is weak at best.
Seems to me like you did it again.
Say anything in order to win, right?
I don't think anyone expected you to actually say "oops, yea you got me". But many others can see it even if you can't.
Yeah, I know. Funny, isn’t it? What makes it even funnier is that she changed what I wrote when she quoted me, but I guess somehow that’s fine in her mind.
Giving masters to players of all playstyles, with players selecting their most important masters first, means mobs will need to be adjusted upwards by ~8 - 10% in order to provide the same challenge. This will make content hard on alts who may not have access to masters via the RA. Failing to do this will result in all content being noticably easier. Bolded the contradictory. You might be able to equip one toon. But not all. Thus not all are given free masters.Btw, we have gone through this at least two times before. Compare the mobs in Bonemire with those in Kylong. Compare those in RoK instances with those in TSO ones. Masters have always been one of the few reasons to run an instance that no longer drops items of worth to you. Remove that and you remove a large part of the replayability of the game.True. But content will get boring the one or other way. If the game does not offers something to you, it might be that game is over. Nothing lasts forever. Grinding in any incarnation is nothing I would like to do.Masters have long since been one of only 3 things worth buying off the broker. Removing the desire to buy masters off the broker slows the circulation of in game coin past its already slow rate.I doubt that there will be no need for masters on the broker anymore. The masters I would like to buy aren't there anyways, and the ones that are are just the junk masters nobody really needs or are highly overpriced. I still would like to see more stuff on the broker, that's true. And I still will buy a master from the broker with or w/o the RA.
Giving masters to players of all playstyles, with players selecting their most important masters first, means mobs will need to be adjusted upwards by ~8 - 10% in order to provide the same challenge. This will make content hard on alts who may not have access to masters via the RA. Failing to do this will result in all content being noticably easier.
Bolded the contradictory. You might be able to equip one toon. But not all. Thus not all are given free masters.
Btw, we have gone through this at least two times before. Compare the mobs in Bonemire with those in Kylong. Compare those in RoK instances with those in TSO ones.
Masters have always been one of the few reasons to run an instance that no longer drops items of worth to you. Remove that and you remove a large part of the replayability of the game.
True. But content will get boring the one or other way. If the game does not offers something to you, it might be that game is over. Nothing lasts forever. Grinding in any incarnation is nothing I would like to do.
Masters have long since been one of only 3 things worth buying off the broker. Removing the desire to buy masters off the broker slows the circulation of in game coin past its already slow rate.
I doubt that there will be no need for masters on the broker anymore. The masters I would like to buy aren't there anyways, and the ones that are are just the junk masters nobody really needs or are highly overpriced. I still would like to see more stuff on the broker, that's true. And I still will buy a master from the broker with or w/o the RA.
Alienor wrote:
Noaani wrote:Giving masters to players of all playstyles, with players selecting their most important masters first, means mobs will need to be adjusted upwards by ~8 - 10% in order to provide the same challenge. This will make content hard on alts who may not have access to masters via the RA. Failing to do this will result in all content being noticably easier. Bolded the contradictory. You might be able to equip one toon. But not all. Thus not all are given free masters.Btw, we have gone through this at least two times before. Compare the mobs in Bonemire with those in Kylong. Compare those in RoK instances with those in TSO ones. Masters have always been one of the few reasons to run an instance that no longer drops items of worth to you. Remove that and you remove a large part of the replayability of the game.True. But content will get boring the one or other way. If the game does not offers something to you, it might be that game is over. Nothing lasts forever. Grinding in any incarnation is nothing I would like to do.Masters have long since been one of only 3 things worth buying off the broker. Removing the desire to buy masters off the broker slows the circulation of in game coin past its already slow rate.I doubt that there will be no need for masters on the broker anymore. The masters I would like to buy aren't there anyways, and the ones that are are just the junk masters nobody really needs or are highly overpriced. I still would like to see more stuff on the broker, that's true. And I still will buy a master from the broker with or w/o the RA.
I agree with these statements and will go one further.
As it is right now, I have enough money to buy 5 or 6 masters from the broker. However, I have not done so since I am still saving my plat for the day (if it ever comes) when the couple of must-have masters show up (at least for a price that is not unconscionable).
So, the end result is that if I can get a must-have from the RA, I would gladly purchase 3 or 4 of my other masters from the broker that have gone unsold for several months. Everyone wins.
Noaani wrote:the majority of raiders know someone in each of the top end guilds that exist in this game
the majority of raiders know someone in each of the top end guilds that exist in this game
I know enough people, as does Gage, to get a very good idea that the majority of raiders experiances in this game are teh same as ours.
You've vastly stepped-down your claim from, as a singular raider -- just like the majority of all raiders -- knowing someone in every top end guild on every server (contacts in hundred(s) of guilds), to ... knowing enough people to believe yourself able to paint an accurate picture of what every single raiding guild experiences.
I still gravely doubt you can paint that picture, but I'll certainly conceed you probably have contacts enough to get a feel for what a couple dozen top-end raiding guilds do. I have a good feel for what a couple dozen do too; it doesn't diminish the fact that some make good coin selling masters -- whether donated by members from solo drops, heroic instances, farming out old raid zones for kicks, or wherever. I'm still not claiming it's any raiding guild's majority source of income.
Pro Tip: I've said there's no legitimate objection possible from anyone making money selling Masters.
This is nothing you have not been told before, I am just hoping you will think about it for a second and realise that yes, this is an accurate commentary on why raiders should not be opposed to the RA based on the principle of lowered master sales.
QuestingCrafter wrote:
knowing someone in every top end guild on every server (contacts in hundred(s) of guilds),
See, this is the mistake your making.
There are maybe 25 - 30 guilds that I would consider top end, not hundred(s). Between those guilds, I know hundreds of people, but your vastly overestimating the size of top end raiding in this game (or vastly underestimating what constitutes top end).
Just because a guild raids, doesn't make them top end.
So?
Short of being childish and petty, what is the point of this post?
In the post you quoted, I pointed out my reasons for simply saying "so?"
You, however, did not.
urgthock wrote:So?Short of being childish and petty, what is the point of this post?In the post you quoted, I pointed out my reasons for simply saying "so?"You, however, did not.
Let's not head down this path.
Thanks,
Samulbrar wrote:
Noaani wrote:urgthock wrote:So?Short of being childish and petty, what is the point of this post?In the post you quoted, I pointed out my reasons for simply saying "so?"You, however, did not.Let's not head down this path.Thanks,
Whole thread is down this path and has been since about page 50 of the first thread. At this point it's just a back and forth of two sides talking past each other. You may as well lock the thread because it's been pretty much nothing but,"lazy people don't deserve masters" and " you people are really liars and just care about the platz" since page 10. The OP already asked for a lock too when he saw it going this way. Anything that can be said has been said already, it didn't really change anything and all the arguments are just being repeated exactly as we said they would in the first thread when we saw how poor the dev interaction was. Unless the devs are conducting a social experiment in how to turn the player base against each other(suggested by page 50 of the first thread as well), these threads never served a real purpose based on the actual dev posts recieved and the current state of the RA. May as well stop it now if you're going to start modding.
Deson wrote:
these threads never served a real purpose based on the actual dev posts recieved and the current state of the RA.
/agree.
For future referance for the developers of this game, if you have no intention of altering a new feature of the game, don't waste your time and ours by starting up a feedback thread.
Its nothing short of an insult.
Deson wrote:these threads never served a real purpose based on the actual dev posts recieved and the current state of the RA./agree.For future referance for the developers of this game, if you have no intention of altering a new feature of the game, don't waste your time and ours by starting up a feedback thread.Its nothing short of an insult.
Actually I don't mind it so much if they don't plan to alter it, I do mind if they don't really talk about it at all and just assume those who don't like it shouldn't be talked to. If anything was learned about how to ask for feedback and roll out a new feature as was stated in the first thread, I don't see it and if I do, it wasn't positive. I said everything else I have to about it already in each of the other threads.
Noih@Kithicor wrote:urgthock wrote:Then you must be blind. Here, do a little research.http://eq2.zam.com/db/broker.htmlprice put up does not equal price sold for.a Master put up does not guarantee a sale of a MasterSome guilds use the broker as an extension of the guild bank shoving prices upwards.Please stop with the personal insults, and explain your reasoning.No, urgthock is 100% correct in this.By the way, this leads me to my next issue. There is currently someone selling a T2 treasured adornment on Najena for 9999p (+ broker fees). Obviously crafters are making too much money, therefore an NPC that offers all crafted gear in the game for no effort or cost needs to be added to the game.
Noih@Kithicor wrote:
urgthock wrote:Then you must be blind. Here, do a little research.http://eq2.zam.com/db/broker.htmlprice put up does not equal price sold for.a Master put up does not guarantee a sale of a MasterSome guilds use the broker as an extension of the guild bank shoving prices upwards.Please stop with the personal insults, and explain your reasoning.
Then you must be blind. Here, do a little research.http://eq2.zam.com/db/broker.html
http://eq2.zam.com/db/broker.html
price put up does not equal price sold for.
a Master put up does not guarantee a sale of a Master
Some guilds use the broker as an extension of the guild bank shoving prices upwards.
Please stop with the personal insults, and explain your reasoning.
No, urgthock is 100% correct in this.
By the way, this leads me to my next issue. There is currently someone selling a T2 treasured adornment on Najena for 9999p (+ broker fees). Obviously crafters are making too much money, therefore an NPC that offers all crafted gear in the game for no effort or cost needs to be added to the game.
but, but, I love my bone rocking chair and do not really want to sell it for the 1000plat its up on the broker for, it used to be my "officer chair" in a guildhall.
I can not make it anymore since I changed crafting professions, and do not want to lose it in my bank or house.
*snip* Snarky Removed. The Question remains how does one make a significant portion of thie income from Master Sales other then by an already removed exploit ( Mistemoore Manor and brawlers ) Lump sum income yes, but geneerally insignificant compared to coin loot/body drops/shinys or harvesting income in the amount of time between finding another master for sale.
PS: I am neutral to the RA, sliding more to the against from these threads. I am of the " the marketing dept said do this" theory. Bad for the game, good for subscriptions. I can not be the only person thinking of moving one or more max level characters to another account in the wake of this announcement.
There are maybe 25 - 30 guilds that I would consider top end, not hundred(s). Between those guilds, I know hundreds of people, but your vastly overestimating the size of top end raiding in this game (or vastly underestimating what constitutes top end).Just because a guild raids, doesn't make them top end.
There are dozens of raiding guilds on my server alone; by top-end, I mean the 5-10 guilds (or alliances, counting as one entry per alliance) on each server. Accordingly, 22 servers at 5-10 top-end guilds each = 110-220 top-end guilds "in the entire game".
If you want to talk the cream of the crop across the entire game, I'd probably come up with a short list of eleven or twelve guilds that are eminent. There are plenty more raiding TSO regularly (but not clearing everything, obviously).
When you said, "[t]here is always talk about various things between raiders, and no one that I know of in any guild on any server [...]" it certainly didn't sound like you were talking about only the elite of the elite, but ALL raiders. Coupled with your assertions about direction connections, it was easy to conclude you claimed to be connected to hundred(s) of upper-end (per server) raiding guilds -- which is preposterous of course.
Clarifying your language, it's more apparent you mean, "I have contacts in some upper-end raiding guilds, more than just a few, and I personally assure you none of them make the majority of their plat from Master sales" -- a claim which I never asserted, but against which you doggedly defend for your own reasons. =D
There are dozens of raiding guilds on my server alone; by top-end, I mean the 5-10 guilds (or alliances, counting as one entry per alliance) on each server.
Top end guilds are those that have cleared all instanced content bar Munzak, and have killed avatars in TSO. There are currently about 35 such guilds in the game.
Anything else is just another second tier raiding guild, which I personally don't care too much about.
Accordingly, 22 servers at 5-10 top-end guilds each = 110-220 top-end guilds "in the entire game".
There are currently 27 live servers for this game, not 22. How can you attempt to have a remotly in depth conversation with someone about this game when you don't even know that?
Atan@Unrest wrote:
Masters drop like candy, we need this because?
Because I don't want to pay a thousand plat each for a handful of spells?
Anyway, the impression I get from your comments is that you're one of these people who farmed/bought a buncha low masters to try and dominate the pointless "most masters" ranking. If that is the case then I suppose I might wanna be butthurt over this new game mechanic as well. But, I'm not, and will just laugh at all the people who wasted time and money chasing that stupid ranking.
StaticLex wrote:
Atan@Unrest wrote:Masters drop like candy, we need this because?Because I don't want to pay a thousand plat each for a handful of spells?Anyway, the impression I get from your comments is that you're one of these people who farmed/bought a buncha low masters to try and dominate the pointless "most masters" ranking. If that is the case then I suppose I might wanna be butthurt over this new game mechanic as well. But, I'm not, and will just laugh at all the people who wasted time and money chasing that stupid ranking.
What if the Research Assistant handed out T4 void armors for free instead of just master spells?
