(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, UltimateSpinDash said: See, you make a claim here without real arguments and present it as gospel. That's because all of the arguments have already been presented in the thread. Arguments which you keep ignoring, btw. I am just getting tired of repeating them constantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhekemi Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 14 minutes ago, Drasiel said: Man there is a lot of anger in this thread. You know what it reminds me of? The stamina Bar. Mhmm. That said, we got hung up on "minor annoyance" purely because DesecratedFlame got hung up on my use of the words, took it as evidence that I didn't actually care about the issue, and was unwilling to even see room for changes to address it--all of which were not true. Additionally, my pedantic insistence on a minor annoyance over an actual issue or problem goes to my point that reworks better serve larger-scale problems (for the players and the devs). Gelkor made a great counter-point recently about map holes being minor, yet changed game-wide, and abbacephas countered quite nicely that the map holes were an innocuous change we didn't notice, even if game-wide. That holds up pretty well here. This is a game-wide change, if implemented as DesecratedFlame suggests, that we will notice, and possibly take offense to--in that context, defining it as a minor annoyance seems important. But fair point on the cost of the workarounds often being higher than Stamina's used to be. 14 minutes ago, Drasiel said: Whether that means ammo pool changes, ammo pickup changes, or a complete overhaul I have no idea, but it's good to be discussing. True. And to be clear, this was never in dispute: no one said changes shouldn't happen. I've personally offered a variety of solutions. Feel free to look over them. But, once again, what's astonishing is that DesecratedFlame agrees with your post without question and says "Well said". Again, I think this is because you, overall, agree with his suggestion. Because I disagree (and many like me), our suggestions for other solutions (whether existing ones, or new ones) are ignored, or in my case, he told me to make a new thread, because this thread was for discussing the merits of his suggested solution. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreddeth Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 The "Dead Rant Thread" Checklist (TM): OP posts misinformation, a personal opinion, or a flat-out bad idea as if it were incontrovertible truth: Check, as we have demonstrated well enough. OP and any applicable supporters mock, ignore, or attack anyone expressing the criticism their post is justly due: Check. This has been your modus operandi since your first reply DesecratedFlame. People on one or both sides lose their patience, civility is broken, and someone starts a flame-war: Pending. One more sparking clash of your brittle, flinty temperament against our logic's steel just might do it. People who were primarily interested in either actual discussion or educating the OP lose hope and abandon thread: Pending. I think there are maybe three people who think discussing with you is still worthwhile at this point, and I'm not one of them. The Mod Squad come in, lock the thread, and hand out free samples of disciplinary action: Pending. You might want to avoid this, DF, since you've given the impression of being the kind of person who's earned a few warning points already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateSpinDash Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 5 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: That's because all of the arguments have already been presented in the thread. Arguments which you keep ignoring, btw. I am just getting tired of repeating them constantly. I literally just skimmed the first three pages, paying special attention to YOUR posts. What little "arguments" you actually brought up were ripped to shreds by others. You just refuse to admit it. Edited October 23, 2016 by UltimateSpinDash Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 4 minutes ago, Rhekemi said: Because I disagree (and many like me), our suggestions for other solutions (whether existing ones, or new ones) are ignored, or in my case, he told me to make a new thread, because this thread was for discussing the merits of his suggested solution. The way things like this work is you come up with an idea, you refine that idea, you compare it to the existing system. You can do this with multiple solutions simultaneously, then if you get to the point where you are going to implement a new system, you start comparing the pros and cons of the various alternative systems to pick the best one or to combine them. Saying we should not even consider this one because a better one might come along in the future is nonsensical and would only result in nothing ever getting done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordMazulia Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 At this point, it seems clear that the OP has no intention of considering anyone else's opinion unless they agree with him. I've seen a lot of people willing to discuss other options, but those options are, for the most part, ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 12 minutes ago, LordMazulia said: At this point, it seems clear that the OP has no intention of considering anyone else's opinion unless they agree with him. I've seen a lot of people willing to discuss other options, but those options are, for the most part, ignored. Protip: Getting bullied into saying "I'm wrong, and you're right," just because there are more of you saying it, is not the same thing as "considering other people's opinions." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) But you've gotta consider what everyone else is saying. Look at our responses and look back on your response. "Is there more to it than just this?" "Maybe I can change this or this to fit with what other people are saying" "I may not agree with this, but I can see where they're going with this." That's what discussion is about. There is no "one" solution to anything. This isn't a war. You're not supposed to be fighting anyone. Get outta here, Captain America. Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)abbacephas Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 20 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: The way things like this work is you come up with an idea, you refine that idea, you compare it to the existing system. You can do this with multiple solutions simultaneously, then if you get to the point where you are going to implement a new system, you start comparing the pros and cons of the various alternative systems to pick the best one or to combine them. Saying we should not even consider this one because a better one might come along in the future is nonsensical and would only result in nothing ever getting done. Irony, thy name is DesecratedFlame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 5 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said: This isn't a war. You're not supposed to be fighting anyone. When someone just busts out a "you're/it's stupid," it's a little hard not to get defensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhekemi Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: The way things like this work is you come up with an idea, you refine that idea, you compare it to the existing system.You can do this with multiple solutions simultaneously, then if you get to the point where you are going to implement a new system, you start comparing the pros and cons of the various alternative systems to pick the best one or to combine them.Saying we should not even consider this one because a better one might come along in the future is nonsensical and would only result in nothing ever getting done. Thing is, you suggested one solution. A poor one that wasn't well presented, didn't take into account existing solutions (how it would affect gear and play styles) or even list pros and cons for the idea. Your original concept presentation (and I will use this word again, I don't mind if I get another warning point because the word is accurate, not an insult) was a lazy presentation. It wasn't well thought-out in the first post, even if you've thought about it for years. You tried to support it with evidence in subsequent arguments, but it wasn't very beneficial to the suggestion itself. If you post a topic in public, the public will vet it based on the information provided. As long as it isn't bashing, insults and flaming, the criticism is valid. You don't get to dictate, or decide how they vet it. It doesn't matter if we were negative, as long as it wasn't an insult or bashing, it was valid negative criticism. We judged the merits of your suggestion against existing systems, proposal systems, and against the circumstances that necessitate the suggestion itself (poor ammo consumption weapons). Your suggestion came up lacking, repeatedly. Refining the idea is your job, and you did not refine it. You dogmatically defended it, and eventually (after you and I had gone back and forth initially) said it could go on super-weapons only. At some point after that, I'm not sure when, you decided I just wanted to win the argument and shut off. That's about as refined as it got. We can also help refine the idea, absolutely, but we don't have to. Many of us attempted to do this, but you disregarded. You only seem open to ideas on refinement if someone openly agrees with your original concept. If they disagree, you go into battle mode. You put it on us to prove your idea was unnecessary (we did), and to prove it wasn't dissimilar from ammo pies, without ever properly outlining, justifying, or presenting your idea to begin with. You know, I may have failed to destroy your argument, but you're doing a fine job of discrediting your own suggestion with your actions. Edited October 23, 2016 by Rhekemi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 2 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: When someone just busts out a "you're/it's stupid," it's a little hard not to get defensive. Shouldn't even treat that as a response. Prove that you're the better man by not letting that sway you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ariivanasan Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) i am + for this idea. this game need stop nerfing us and buffing enemys and give us something good Edited October 23, 2016 by ariivanasan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) Just now, ariivanasan said: i am + for this idea. this game need stop nerfing all and give us something good This is a nerf. Increasing reload time is absolutely brutal. Try standing on those ice fields and reload you weapon. Not fun is it? Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 7 minutes ago, Rhekemi said: Refining the idea is your job 10 minutes ago, Rhekemi said: We can also help refine the idea, absolutely, but we don't have to. Actually, it's not. At the end of the day, your opinions don't even really matter. The only ones that matter are DE's. I don't have an "obligation" or a "job" to do here. The only reason I am even "choosing" to discuss it with you is to refine the idea. 11 minutes ago, Rhekemi said: and eventually (after you and I had gone back and forth initially) said it could go on super-weapons only To use the colloquial, "duh." That's the way this works. People go back and forth until something clicks. I am not going to magically and fundamentally change my opinion just because you disagree with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 11 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said: This is a nerf. It's not. It's a balance. Yes, nerfs are balances and so are buffs. This does both. Which depends on the weapon. It would buff a lot of older weapons, while reigning in the meta weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 7 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: It's not. It's a balance. Yes, nerfs are balances and so are buffs. This does both. Which depends on the weapon. It would buff a lot of older weapons, while reigning in the meta weapons. How so? What you're describing doesn't sound like balance, it sounds like raising the bar so older weapons can be used but meta weapons still be meta weapons. How is that balance? Shouldn't everything be viable or at the very least, situational? Nothing should have a clear advantage over everything else which even after infinite ammo, those meta weapons will still have their dominance. Spamming the Simulor with Mirage will still be a thing. Hell at this point, why not make energy infinite? If certain abilities are overpowered, then lets just make energy infinite so others can keep up. This logic is pretty flawed. Buffing everything else but letting the kings stay kings is not balance. Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 11 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: Actually, it's not. At the end of the day, your opinions don't even really matter. The only ones that matter are DE's. I don't have an "obligation" or a "job" to do here. The only reason I am even "choosing" to discuss it with you is to refine the idea. To use the colloquial, "duh." That's the way this works. People go back and forth until something clicks. I am not going to magically and fundamentally change my opinion just because you disagree with it. Dude, at this point you're provoking other people and making them dislike your idea even more. Just stop. If our opinions don't matter, then why even discuss them with us? For lols? This is just not the way to go man... Edited October 23, 2016 by Tricky5hift Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-N7-Leonhart Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Infinite energy FTW and put cooldowns on every ability to compensate. ..........like hell that will happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rhekemi Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 (edited) 36 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: When someone just busts out a "you're/it's stupid," it's a little hard not to get defensive. Yes. It can be if you let it. I already told you how I handle that in my first post here. But come off it, DesacratedFlame, insults stopped several pages ago, yet you're still defensive. The concept itself hasn't progressed. If we're responsible for any of the gridlock (and I'm sure we are), so too are you. It cuts both ways. What, besides insults which are largely gone, is holding you back from refining this idea further? Does the idea really have the same merits it did when you started it? What should you change, as Tricky5hift points out? Also, no one is bullying you at present, and Captain America's black and white speech is just that: it's very black and white, and only works when everyone else is wrong and you are right, when you are standing by that river of truth. If you quote that, then perhaps that answers several questions for me: you truly do believe you're right, and everyone else is wrong. We're simply a mob (despite being fellow gamers with well-reasoned arguments and opinions who disagree with you), and the only people worth hearing are those that agree with you. I did notice a shift in your responses/tone once I re-stated firmly that I disagree with your central argument, even though I believed there was room for other solutions. It seems like you simply believe there is no room for other solutions. And lo, the truth becomes clearer. This is another reason threads like this aren't a bad thing to continue: eventually all will be made clear, and from there, people can draw their own conclusions. 20 minutes ago, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: Actually, it's not. At the end of the day, your opinions don't even really matter. The only ones that matter are DE's. I don't have an "obligation" or a "job" to do here. The only reason I am even "choosing" to discuss it with you is to refine the idea. To use the colloquial, "duh." That's the way this works. People go back and forth until something clicks. I am not going to magically and fundamentally change my opinion just because you disagree with it. I work the other way 'round for the most part. I do as much work refining an idea as possible, I think through the angles as I see them, then I present it for critical review and defend or change it as needed. True improvement, true refinement, comes from criticism and support. Not just one or the other. You misunderstand how this works; no one is asking you to change because someone else disagrees. But remaining open to change is a positive. Not a negative. Especially if people have given you not only opinions, but objective viewpoints based on knowledge, experience, and facts, that a change is necessary (or in the case of unlimited ammo, unnecessary). It doesn't mean you fundamentally change an opinion because someone disagrees. Nope. As for the bold, you couldn't be more wrong. This is clearly another key factor in our impasse, and I believe my time here has come to an end. One last thing I wanted to add but didn't (about why not to engage in a debate) was this: If you only engage in a debate or a discussion to hear your own viewpoints, only stick to your talking points, and don't actually care what the other side has to say (unless they agree with you, which you've demonstrated numerous times) you shouldn't engage in discussion or debate. It's a selfish and you only want an echo-chamber, or to hear from a select few you deem relevant (DE). Unfortunately for that mindset and lucky for Warframe, DE believes the voices of its community are far more relevant than you do. Edited October 23, 2016 by Rhekemi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 8 minutes ago, Tricky5hift said: Spamming the Simulor with Mirage will still be a thing. not if they can fire like 3 orbs them have a 10 second reload. 2 minutes ago, -BM-Leonhart said: Infinite energy FTW and put cooldowns on every ability to compensate. ..........like hell that will happen. It will never happen, but it would be an improvement and better serve the goal DE is trying to achieve when compared to their work-arounds such as power denial (e.g. nullifiers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Just now, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: not if they can fire like 3 orbs them have a 10 second reload. Unless Synoid Simulor gets a magazine nerf, I don't see this happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-N7-Leonhart Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 Just now, (PS4)DesecratedFlame said: not if they can fire like 3 orbs them have a 10 second reload. It will never happen, but it would be an improvement and better serve the goal DE is trying to achieve when compared to their work-arounds such as power denial (e.g. nullifiers). 10 seconds reload? I see, I see, you want to attend to this game's funeral that badly huh? Well, I don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)DesecratedFlame Posted October 23, 2016 Author Share Posted October 23, 2016 Just now, Rhekemi said: But remaining open to change, especially if people have given you not only opinions, but objective viewpoints based on knowledge, experience, and facts, that a change is necessary (or in the case of unlimited ammo, unnecessary). I am not easily swayed, but that does not mean that I am not open to it. The simple truth is, your arguments are not as persuasive as you seem to think. 2 minutes ago, -BM-Leonhart said: 10 seconds reload? I see, I see, you want to attend to this game's funeral that badly huh? Well, I don't. I only want super long reloads on super weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tricky5hift Posted October 23, 2016 Share Posted October 23, 2016 What about sniper rifles like the Rubico? It already has a 3 second reload and that feels like an eternity. You really think its worth extending just for infinite ammo? As if people ever ran out of ammo for sniper rifles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts