So Relics will be vertical progression, power creep and pay to win? [Merged]

[Sobx.1758]

On 7/18/2023 at 9:31 PM, Redfeather.6401 said:

So much drama over decoupling mechanics. Thank god none of you are game designers. Nothing would ever get done.

6 hours ago, Cuks.8241 said:

Hehe my thoughts exactly. If we had employees so reluctant of any changes like so many on this forum we would be stuck in the 80s.

3 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

If I had employees so reluctant of any changes they would no longer be my employees.

Except like @Drizzly.4562 rightfully pointed out, most people aren't complaining about "change being implemented" nor did they (including me) want to somehow stop it.

DeathPanel, I know you specifically already tried doing similar thing in another thread where you constantly reverted into "nothing can possibly change because it's not a showstopper", as if people asked for huge "mechnical changes" when they didn't. Quick reminder that few minutes later you went to another thread and proposed that anet simply adds legendary relics to have an easy solution to the issue. Somehow now you're back to misrepresenting what people say about this change to paint it as if they're "reluctant of any changes"? Is this actually what you think is happening here?

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[DeathPanel.8362]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Except like @Drizzly.4562 rightfully pointed out, most people aren't complaining about "change being implemented" nor did they (including me) want to somehow stop it.

DeathPanel, I know you specifically already tried doing similar thing in another thread where you constantly reverted into "nothing can possibly change because it's not a showstopper", as if people asked for huge "mechnical changes" when they didn't. Quick reminder that few minutes later you went to another thread and proposed that anet simply adds legendary relics to have an easy solution to the issue. Somehow now you're back to misrepresenting what people say about this change to paint it as if they're "reluctant of any changes"? Is this actually what you think is happening here?

I find it fascinating that you respond when you weren't even named in our posts.  The gentleman dost protest too much, methinks.

Edited July 20, 2023 by DeathPanel.8362
typo

[Astralporing.1957]

9 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

If I had employees so reluctant of any changes they would no longer be my employees.

Indeed. Because if you were pushing changes on a company that would kitten your employees over, they would stop working for you.

Also, notice a significant difference - Anet does not pay me to go along with their wild ideas. Especially if they try to kitten me over.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Astralporing.1957

[DeathPanel.8362]

6 hours ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Indeed. Because if you were pushing changes on a company that would kitten your employees over, they would stop working for you.

Also, notice a significant difference - Anet does not pay me to go along with their wild ideas. Especially if they try to kitten me over.

How did "reluctant of any changes" become "**** your employees over"?  You did a head translate into a strawman again?

I find it very fascinating that all I said was "If I had employees so reluctant of any changes they would no longer be my employees." which doesn't name or target anyone and a bunch of people were so triggered that they responded defensively.  It's almost as if they deep down know that the statement is applicable to them and they self-reported.

[StuckHat.8061]

(Irrelevant.)

Edited July 20, 2023 by StuckHat.8061
[EDIT: Misread Date]

[Astralporing.1957]

27 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

How did "reluctant of any changes" become "**** your employees over"?  You did a head translate into a strawman again?

I find it very fascinating that all I said was "If I had employees so reluctant of any changes they would no longer be my employees." which doesn't name or target anyone and a bunch of people were so triggered that they responded defensively.  It's almost as if they deep down know that the statement is applicable to them and they self-reported.

Let me put it that way: if your employees are so recultant of any changes you propose, the chances are that it's not like they dislike changes in general, but rather that your changes are simply that bad.

If they were good, people would not complain.

[Sobx.1758]

11 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

I find it fascinating that you respond when you weren't even named in our posts.

Oh, I thought that maybe you really were missing something, but apparently you intentionally weave and dodge, so even though before you kept ""responding"" (despite avoiding what you actually quoted), now you started wondering why people talk on the forum without being "named in the posts". Well, that's because it's a public forum and when I see someone who either misses key details or intentionally avoids it, I'll point it out. Even moreso when your attempts at misinterpreting this situation also misinterprets what I was saying about it. Looks like you'll just keep dodging, but the important part is that by now it's clear you know you're doing it. 🤷‍♂️

11 hours ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

The gentleman dost protest too much, methinks.

Am I though? I don't know how many posts I have exactly in this thread, but it's way below 29. You, on the other hand have 148, which is more than half of your overal post count and nearly 3 times more than the next highest poster in this thread. Somehow I am "protesting too much" here? Interesting take on what's happening here.

1 hour ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

How did "reluctant of any changes" become "**** your employees over"?

Well... probably similarly to how "players concerned about implementation and their already acquired gear" turned into "employees being reluctant of any changes" in your posts?

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[idpersona.3810]

35 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Oh, I thought that maybe you really were missing something, but apparently you intentionally weave and dodge, so even though before you kept ""responding"" (despite avoiding what you actually quoted),

This is the conclusion I finally came to. I had assumed initially (and for a while) they were conversing in good faith and later on that maybe were just on the spectrum a bit (which can require more than a bit of patience). But the last few pages convinced me that they were just a bored troll and aren't worth responding to anymore. 🤷‍♂️
Public forums are what they are.

We should get more official information later though, and that will be a significant development.

[DeathPanel.8362]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Well... probably similarly to how "players concerned about implementation and their already acquired gear" turned into "employees being reluctant of any changes" in your posts?

I was responding to someone else talking about people being reluctant to any changes.   I didn't bring it up.  You merely read into it what you wanted as usual.

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

I was responding to someone else talking about people being reluctant to any changes.   I didn't bring it up.  You merely read into it what you wanted as usual.

And that post also did exactly what was mentioned in my post above and what you were apparently so surprised about in yours.

35 minutes ago, idpersona.3810 said:

We should get more official information later though, and that will be a significant development.

Yup

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[DeathPanel.8362]

1 hour ago, Astralporing.1957 said:

Let me put it that way: if your employees are so recultant of any changes you propose, the chances are that it's not like they dislike changes in general, but rather that your changes are simply that bad.

If they were good, people would not complain.

I posed a hypothetical in response to someone else.  The thing about hypotheticals is that the person posing it gets to define the parameters.  You are trying to project your own parameters which I never proposed onto my hypothetical.  It is straw-manning.

[DeathPanel.8362]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

And that post also did exactly what was mentioned in my post above and what you were apparently so surprised about in yours.

None of those posts were addressed to you or anyone else specifically.  They were talking about people not wanting ANY change.  If you weren't such a person then they weren't applicable to you.  So what's the problem?

[Sobx.1758]

4 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

None of those posts were addressed to you or anyone else specifically.

👇

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

(...) so even though before you kept ""responding"" (despite avoiding what you actually quoted), now you started wondering why people talk on the forum without being "named in the posts". Well, that's because it's a public forum and when I see someone who either misses key details or intentionally avoids it, I'll point it out. Even moreso when your attempts at misinterpreting this situation also misinterprets what I was saying about it.(...)

I thought I already explained that. Again, if that explanation is somehow hard to understand for you, tell me what needs to be clarified.

 

4 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

They were talking about people not wanting ANY change.

And, as pointed out even on the previous page right after those posts, "not wanting any change" is not what people in these threads talk about, so it's irrelevant to anything within these threads.

4 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

If you weren't such a person then they weren't applicable to you.  So what's the problem?

What's the problem? For one @Drizzly.4562  asked you (the 3 of you) to explain who exactly you're talking about and you simply avoided it again 🙃

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[DeathPanel.8362]

1 minute ago, Sobx.1758 said:

And, as pointed out even on the previous page right after those posts, "not wanting any change" is not what people in these threads talk about, so it's irrelevant to anything within these threads.

All those people said was some people are "reluctant to have any change".  No one was named or targeted.  The fact that you so defensively and with such hostility respond to these innocuous statements shows someone is insecure about how applicable the statements are to themselves.

[DeathPanel.8362]

2 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

8 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

What's the problem? For one @Drizzly.4562  asked you (the 3 of you) to explain who exactly you're talking about and you simply avoided it again 🙃

Focus please.

 I don't have telepathy I don't know who they were talking about.  I merely responded with a hypothetical about my own employees being completely reluctant of having any change.  It's just fascinating you're responding so vehemently to something that presumably isn't even applicable to you.

[Sobx.1758]

4 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

 I don't have telepathy I don't know who they were talking about.  I merely responded with a hypothetical about my own employees being completely reluctant of having any change.  It's just fascinating you're responding so vehemently to something that presumably isn't even applicable to you.

Nobody knows, not even the initial poster because it was a randomly made up misconstruction of what is being said by people in these threads that you eagerly jumped on. Weirdly enough, someone making "that hypothetical" was fine, but Astral correcting it into "what would be more fitting" was somehow an unthinkable concept to you. 🙄 Glad you understand the point now.

Edited July 20, 2023 by Sobx.1758

[DeathPanel.8362]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

Nobody knows, not even the initial poster because it was a randomly made up misconstruction of what is being said by people in these threads that you eagerly jumped on. Glad you understand the point now. 🙋‍♂️ 

 I made a hypothetical about my own employees being completely reluctant to change in response to someone else talking about some people being reluctant of change.  No one was named or targeted specifically.  I don't see why anyone who those statements don't apply would so vehemently and defensively respond.

[Sobx.1758]

7 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

 I made a hypothetical about my own employees being completely reluctant to change in response to someone else talking about some people being reluctant of change.  No one was named or targeted specifically.  I don't see why anyone who those statements don't apply would so vehemently and defensively respond.

Ah, so you just decided to start with a random offtopic irrelevant to anything in the thread, thanks for explaining.

[Drizzly.4562]

6 minutes ago, DeathPanel.8362 said:

I don't see why anyone who those statements don't apply would so vehemently and defensively respond.

Yes you do.  You intentionally globbed onto a misleading statement to stir kitten and further mischaracterize the arguments in the thread.  No one is surprised, especially not you.

We need a yawn reaction.

[DeathPanel.8362]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

Ah, so you just decided to start with a random offtopic irrelevant to anything in the thread, thanks for explaining.

It's generally relevant in that changes or the reluctance of changes are being discussed.  I just added a tangential hypothetical.  Ironically you're the one that's attempting to stir up a whole argument chain over a couple of innocuous statements.

[DeathPanel.8362]

Just now, Drizzly.4562 said:

Yes you do.  You intentionally globbed onto a misleading statement to stir kitten and further mischaracterize the arguments in the thread.  No one is surprised, especially not you.

We need a yawn reaction.

Why would anything be stirred up if the hypothetical response isn't applicable or targeted at anyone?  Seems like you're the one that's stirring up an argument over totally innocuous posts that weren't even addressed to you.

[Drizzly.4562]

Just now, DeathPanel.8362 said:

Why would anything be stirred up if the hypothetical response isn't applicable or targeted at anyone?  Seems like you're the one that's stirring up an argument over totally innocuous posts that weren't even addressed to you.

K.

[Sobx.1758]

Just now, DeathPanel.8362 said:

It's generally relevant in that changes or the reluctance of changes are being discussed. 

But people here weren't "reluctant to changes", they pointed out specific pain points you avoided and then made a random strawman. When asked why was this even made up in this thread, who possibly could it be directed at, you run from addressing it by repeating "it wasn't directed at anything and anyone!", but now... it's relevant to what is being discussed?
No, it's not and you clearly know it, seeing how you keep running from addressing any specifics. You're seriously just running in circles after your own tail here, I think at this point everything is clear about your stance here. 🙋‍♂️

[DeathPanel.8362]

Just now, Sobx.1758 said:

But people here weren't "reluctant to changes", they pointed out specific pain points you avoided and then made a random strawman. When asked why was this even made up in this thread, who possibly could it be directed at, you run from addressing it by repeating "it wasn't directed at anything and anyone!", but now... it's relevant to what is being discussed?

So go argue with the person that made that post then.  I merely responded to him with a hypothetical about my employees.  I'm increasingly suspecting that those statements aren't as inapplicable as I thought they were considering the vehement responses.

[Sreoom.3690]

Please ANET, put this thread out of it's misery by releasing your update on how Legendary Runes will be impacted by the new relic system and your proposed resolution that will mitigate the loss of Legendary Equipment Functionality.