Malus.2184

I like that since it means that JW will tell one cohesive story with tendrils rather than like they did in SotO where it was two separate stories. This resulted in the massive waste of Cerus and two story lines that felt rushed. I think the idea for that came from the positive response people had to the same setup in LW s4. The reality is that the Tropes are doing a lot of the heavy lifting and Joko is reduced to a joke because you're unable to keep a kingdom in existence for 250 years. For example, having a human Vizir who handled the day-to-day business was brilliant because the only one who knew what a living human would need was another living human.

To be fair, TeaPot and some of the creators around him are suffering from cranial-rectal syndrome and it spread to the people who take them as gospel. Just look at the OW builds on HS. "If CC is needed..." Context: CC Is needed past EoD. "If Boonstrip is needed..." Context: Boonstrip if you do Power DPS is vastly needed from SotO and onwards since Protection is so omnipresent and removing it is a 33% DPS increase, and for people so infatuated with DPS failing to communicate this is extremely weird. In JW your second weapon should be ranged if you have one since there's a lot of area denial and ranged attacks and being able to do damage without pulling everything and being able to do damage in general is vastly better than a 50% increase that you never get to use.

The term "omega doomed" is a TeaPot saying, so yeah, I've figured out where you have your parasocial head.

Some people are so deeply weird that they have to think they are the normal to be able to stomach it. It's the "I'm not weird. you are!" expressed without stating it.

You want both new runes and a revamp of the runes? This shows that nothing will ever be able to make you happy. You could say that you want new runes and a rework of the Relic system since that system unless you have the Legendary Relic, is indeed bad.

Did you miss the part where one of the telegraphs to a high-damage attack sometimes bugs out and is invisible?

...The goal of any game is the reward you get at the end, whether it's an item or a score to which you can compare your last performance. That's how gamification works, another topic you think you know anything about. I have an education in occupational therapy and from that, I have extensive knowledge about gamification. Wiki is just correct enough as it's unable to contain all the relevant information. If you look at the Reference section, which is where all the information in the article is sourced from it's huge. Every one of those references is most likely the same length or longer than the Wiki article. Wiki is just an abstract of the knowledge and thus short an inaccurate.

No. You used GAMES as an example of gamification and compared it to another kind of gambling where several psychological tricks are used to reinforce gambling behaviour.

You have no idea what gamification is or how it works. Please stop trying to explain things you have no understanding of.

His post reeks of faux intellectualism. This is pure Dunning Kruger.

I apologise then, and philosophical claims about real things are utterly useless. Philosophical arguments are about the hypothetical that should ideally never happen. Those examples you give also require skills that are used in what you see as "gameplay." Namely identifying the target, moving to the target, and interacting with the target.

The Pact suffered 90% KIA during the initial attack on the Heart of Maguuma. This would have affected the Orders heavily as well since the 90% KiA would be divided amongst their members. I think that for a long while after the Orders, aside from the Vigil since it has the lowest entry requirement and it only really got back in the story in the later half of LW s4, were largely a non-entity.

Even without referring to anything fancy Collection events are gameplay since they use three mechanics that are present in everything he would call gameplay, movement, identifying a target, and interacting with the target.

When you present a hypothesis or a statement give examples, else you just sound like a git. That's an interpretation of what I learned when I had about The Scientific Method. No dissertation or hypothesis can stand without examples to either prove or disprove the argument made. Those examples will then be challenged. If they stand to the challenge they're valid, if they fall they're invalid and really just a waste of everyone's time. By providing no examples you've essentially created an unfalsifiable hypothesis with goalposts that you can constantly move if people bring up examples that you might have thought of privately and when expressed do show the traits that that you've defined yourself that make it gameplay. There's no value in anything you wrote without also adding examples. This is just "I'm very smat."

This game can never be balanced as long as Boons are a disproportionate aspect of the player's total power.