[Petition] make home instance chests free to open

[Sobx.1758]

13 minutes ago, Jilora.9524 said:

That's your original argument. Then it was he said gathering nodes should be the same as chests.

Because that's what he did/does. Linked you one of the relevant posts, after which you've dropped it and tried making another argument about "pinatas/whatever not needing keys" (when they don't need keys in their OW counterparts either). Nothing about that works in any way against what I keep saying in this thread. As I kept saying since my initial responses to you, it was never about "just naming", it's about mechanics associated with each of those objects. Just because you pretend previous posts stop existing the moment I write another one doesn't make it a fact (nor is it reasonable)). It's not some kind of "only latest response counts!" deal.

Quote

Now you've changed it to they work as their open world counterparts which some have counterparts and many don't. Instead of just saying you don't think they should make this change you obsess over that 1 thing cause he called a chest a node.

Never "changed it to that", because that argument never stopped being relevant. Already linked some posts here:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/104209-petition-make-home-instance-chests-free-to-open/page/4/?tab=comments#comment-1505345

What I say isn't mutually exclusive, so not sure why you're trying to paint it as if either one can work or the other. Both are facts that are simultaniously true. I don't retract one thing when reminding you about the other. I don't retract "the other" thing, when I remind you about the first one again. I'm not forgetting about my previous posts, but apparently you are.

14 minutes ago, StevenL.3761 said:

@Sobx.1758maybe stop nitpicking and make a bullet list of how this change would hurt the players or the game

I thought you've said you're blocking me? And I've already made long posts in this thread, I won't be re-typing everything for you, when you can go back to those posts and simply respond to them this time. I'm pretty sure that's reasonable.

Edited November 5, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Clockless.2503]

On 11/3/2021 at 4:10 PM, ArchonWing.9480 said:

While we're at it, could we make home instance placements better? I generally just use the Rata Sum one because most are horrifically set up.

 

Hoelbrak wouldn't be too bad if you were able to use mounts and gliding.

[Jilora.9524]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Because that's what he did/does. Linked you one of the relevant posts, after which you've dropped it and tried making another argument about "pinatas/whatever not needing keys" (when they don't need keys in their OW counterparts either). Nothing about that works in any way against what I keep saying in this thread.

Never "changed it to that", already linked some posts here:

https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/topic/104209-petition-make-home-instance-chests-free-to-open/page/4/?tab=comments#comment-1505345

What I say isn't mutually exclusive, so not sure why you're trying to paint it like "either one can work or the other". Both are facts that are simultaniously true. I don't retract one thing when reminding you about the other. I don't retract "the other" thing, when I remind you about the first one again.

I thought you've said you're blocking me? And I've already made long posts in this thread, I won't be re-typing everything for you, when you can go back to those posts and simply respond to them this time. I'm pretty sure that's reasonable.

The thing is dude chests aren't nodes. Noone is going to refer to opening nodes after Tarir but in the Home instance because nodes dominate the total you can say I'm looting all my nodes and that would include everything like the Pinata the christmas tree the cargo the gathering nodes the chests the bauble machine the garden the obelisk the cache. Just like I don't have to say I'm using acid crowbars and keys to open the chests you just say keys.

And he could have blocked you as replys from you and me would still show to him as a flaw I guess in the block system

[Zohane.7208]

15 minutes ago, StevenL.3761 said:

False. A causal relationship (=logical connection) between hypotheticals is actually the only prerequisite for it to be a slippery slope argument.

It is indeed a slippery slope, however it's not a slippery slope logical fallacy since the relationship between them is reasonable and logical.

[kharmin.7683]

22 minutes ago, Zohane.7208 said:

Actually it's not - a slippery slope logical fallacy only happens if there's no logical connection between the series of requests. In this case there's a very reasonable and logical series; therefore not a fallacy. IE It's HIGHLY likely that A would lead to B would lead to C.

There's no need to argue this with the OP.   I made my point.   Thanks, anyway.

[robertthebard.8150]

1 hour ago, StevenL.3761 said:

This statement makes absolutely no sense. Free loot is always good. Playing 45 minutes of meta events for a few extra keys just so I can loot my full home is not. Opening the home chests is just not a good enough reason to make me go back to those maps, period.

Things I consider good incentives include zone-specific dailies with their own rewards, and legendary collections. Looting my home is not an incentive for anything. You cannot change my mind on this matter.

Your mistake is thinking I'm trying to change your mind.  I'm not.  I'm just pointing out that you want something for nothing.  Something that you provide proof of in this very post.  Ironically, that's fine.  At least just come out and say that, instead of trying to deflect with "they just don't want change" et al.

[Sobx.1758]

1 minute ago, Jilora.9524 said:

The thing is dude chests aren't nodes.

The thing, "dude", is what I keep repeating and you keep ignoring:

As I kept saying since my initial responses to you, it was never about "just naming", it's about mechanics associated with each of those objects.

You've jumped in the middle of the thread lacking context and initial responses (as you've said yourself you didn't read what I've linked before) and now you're frantically trying to pretend that context didn't matter, while it clearly does. Hopefully we're done here. If you don't think "we're done", then you'll need to stop ignoring what I write just because you know it proves you wrong.

[Jilora.9524]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

The thing, "dude", is what I keep repeating and you keep ignoring:

As I kept saying since my initial responses to you, it was never about "just naming", it's about mechanics associated with each of those objects.

You've jumped in the middle of the thread lacking context and initial responses (as you've said yourself you didn't read what I've linked before) and now you're frantically trying to pretend that context didn't matter, while it clearly does. Hopefully we're done here. If you don't think "we're done", then you'll need to stop ignoring what I write just because you know it proves you wrong.

It's like you just can't comprehend. I read that but didn't click it when Stephan linked it originally. I read it when you linked it 15m ago now you trying to use that lacking comprehension that I had info from in that link so obviously I read it or how would I have that info?

You keep saying it was never about naming when I just linked the response early in the thread from you where it was all about naming. Something like chest are not nodes and never will be no matter how many times you say it. Sure sounds like it was about naming. 

You need to start remembering what you wrote earlier in the thread if we are to continue

[Jilora.9524]

On 11/4/2021 at 9:18 AM, Sobx.1758 said:

The chests still aren't nodes and never were nodes. No matter how many times you'll try to pretend in your posts it's the same thing, it just isn't.

You were given plenty of reasons, you're just dodging them.

 

 

Yes, without a change, facts are very confusing to some people 🥱

Here it is again. Totally about naming. So keep saying never was about naming.

[kharmin.7683]

Anyone advocating for change ought to be the one showing how it would benefit the players, the game and the company behind it.  The burden lies there, not with those opposed.

[Kurrilino.2706]

On 11/3/2021 at 3:04 PM, Sobx.1758 said:

The nodes don't need the keys in the first place. And they still use up the gathering tools. What are you trying to show here?

 

Not sure this comparison works.

People have neverending harvesting tools.

If A-Net could introduce permanent Crowbars and Machete's etc. on the Gem Market, they would have a gold mine

[Forum Moderator.3419]

Hello Everyone,

I'm locking this thread as it has turned into bickering. I've also made a note of your suggestion, OP.

Regards.