Game has dropped in popularity to closed beta level

"

tikitaki wrote:

"

LostForm wrote:

, yet you want gear easier to obtain,

I never said this or claimed this.

"

LostForm wrote:

and effort to obtain that gear to come down.

I never said this or claimed this.

"

LostForm wrote:

You want the time to obtain gear to come way down,

I never said this or claimed this.

"

LostForm wrote:

and you want the overall strength of your gear to go up with less effort.

I never said this or claimed this.

"

LostForm wrote:

You say the game is too easy now, yet you Have to gamble away everything you own on gear.

I said the first half of this, but not the second half. I'm not a gambler and did not play the game in that fashion. I limited my build choices to onces in which I could buy the gear needed with currency as opposed to getting into a situation where I'd be forced to gamble for an upgrade.

"

LostForm wrote:

I think your argument has huge holes personally.

Which holes? Where? Point them out.

"

LostForm wrote:

If you cant deal with not having all the perfect game in gear right now, then you are exactly who i am talking about

Of course I can deal with "not having all the perfect gear."

I don't think I have ever managed to get "perfect gear" in any game I have ever played, and I would never expect to.

Why do you keep inventing imaginary people?

No you said all that.

There are ways to make applying 1000 orbs of fusing one at a time to a piece of gear easier than like 3000 clicks of the mouse, without removing the element of disappointment. So is your argument that you shouldnt have to click 3000 times (valid) or you should never be disappointed in your search for gear (a difference of opinion from the devs).

Please quote exactly where I said any of that.

Because I never did say any of that, and that is not my opinion.

I am not your straw man.

If you're just going to randomly make shit up, you could at least do a better job =p

(why you would think that you understand my opinion better than I do is a mystery)

i think you just very much like straw man arguments.

"

Also the main criticisms with gear that I see have nothing to do with how easy/hard they are to get, but rather how inconsistent they are to get. Most people are used to this from all such games such as D2. RNG is RNG so to speak -- but there comes a point when enough is enough.

For instance, if it currently takes 1000 fuses on average for a 6L (just pulling a number out of my ass) I would see it as a huge improvement if you could use a recipe to spend 2000 fusings (or even more) for a guaranteed 6L.

You want remove the element of disappointment to make getting gear easier. A fixed path to success with no chance of disappointment is easier gear to obtain. This greatly decreases what element of difficulty is in game due to easily perfecting your gear. Once guaranteed success is allowed, it wouldnt make since to make stat crafting be based on chance, so that obstacle would quickly fall as well.

But alas, none of this has to due with visiting the site verse playing the game.

"

LostForm wrote:

"

Also the main criticisms with gear that I see have nothing to do with how easy/hard they are to get, but rather how inconsistent they are to get. Most people are used to this from all such games such as D2. RNG is RNG so to speak -- but there comes a point when enough is enough.

For instance, if it currently takes 1000 fuses on average for a 6L (just pulling a number out of my ass) I would see it as a huge improvement if you could use a recipe to spend 2000 fusings (or even more) for a guaranteed 6L.

You want remove the element of disappointment to make getting gear easier. A fixed path to success with no chance of disappointment is easier gear to obtain. This greatly decreases what element of difficulty is in game.

Please explain in complete, logical sentences, how doubling the amount of fusings to create a 6L (but allowing it to be done in a consistent way) would make the game "easier."

If you think that's not enough, then triple it. If that isn't enough, quadruple it....etc

Consistency is not the same as easy, and if you wish I can give you dozens of real world examples to demonstrate this to you.

"

tikitaki wrote:

"

LostForm wrote:

"

Also the main criticisms with gear that I see have nothing to do with how easy/hard they are to get, but rather how inconsistent they are to get. Most people are used to this from all such games such as D2. RNG is RNG so to speak -- but there comes a point when enough is enough.

For instance, if it currently takes 1000 fuses on average for a 6L (just pulling a number out of my ass) I would see it as a huge improvement if you could use a recipe to spend 2000 fusings (or even more) for a guaranteed 6L.

You want remove the element of disappointment to make getting gear easier. A fixed path to success with no chance of disappointment is easier gear to obtain. This greatly decreases what element of difficulty is in game.

Please explain in complete, logical sentences, how doubling the amount of fusings to create a 6L (but allowing it to be done in a consistent way) would make the game "easier."

If you think that's not enough, then triple it. If that isn't enough, quadruple it....etc

Consistency is not the same as easy, and if you wish I can give you dozens of real world examples to demonstrate this to you.

It doesnt matter how much the guaranteed success costs, it is easier than dealing with disappoint of not getting your gear after spending what you thought was satisfactory amount of orbs to guarantee your success.

The element of disappointment is ingrained in the game. Making your successes more meaningful.

You can already do that.

It's called trading your orbs for the 6L you want (I have done this already).

The only time you can't is when the 6L item you want does not exist within the game or is simply unavailable to trade.

This is why I mentioned earlier that I played popular builds specifically to avoid the situation of being "forced" to gamble.

Farming is an example of "good" RNG.

For instance, when farming you always walk away with more than you started with. The only thing that changes is that you might not find specifically the item you were looking for, but you WILL find stuff. You will currency, orbs, rares, and uniques over time.

It is a purely additive process.

If you can't see the difference between say, farming...And spending fusing orbs going for a 6L, then I truly feel sorry for you.

Also, your one thread trying to statistically prove the player base is non-existant (which is rediculously faulty assumptions used to arrive at your conclusions) are not the trolling of the boards i was referring to.

You asserted you werent the 'they' trolling the boards, I largely agree, but if you insist on pointing out that you feel you might be included, I will continue to show you how your argument for guaranteed success is largely inline with the 'they trolls' I was referring to.

I dont think having conversations about the systems in game is trolling. Asserting faulty assumptions, having them debunked legitimately from about 15 different angles, yet clinging to the thread is pretty much trolling though.

"

tikitaki wrote:

Farming is an example of "good" RNG.

For instance, when farming you always walk away with more than you started with. The only thing that changes is that you might not find specifically the item you were looking for, but you WILL find stuff. You will currency, orbs, rares, and uniques over time.

It is a purely additive process.

I do disagree mildly here, as you do take risks everytime you leave town. People die all the time to reasons other than desync. Also you can roll up strong maps using currency and not come out ahead from running the map. Farming is not purely additive, it is a gamble everytime.

Though you can strongly stack the odds in your favor while farming in several ways.

"

LostForm wrote:

Also, your one thread trying to statistically prove the player base is non-existant (which is rediculously faulty assumptions used to arrive at your conclusions) are not the trolling of the boards i was referring to.

You asserted you werent the 'they' trolling the boards, I largely agree, but if you insist on pointing out that you feel you might be included, I will continue to show you how your argument for guaranteed success is largely inline with the 'they trolls' I was referring to.

I dont think having conversations about the systems in game is trolling. Asserting faulty assumptions, having them debunked legitimately from about 15 different angles, yet clinging to the thread is pretty much trolling though.

Well I made this thread, so I do feel somewhat responsible for combating erroneous straw man arguments from people like yourself.

You haven't managed to quote me saying any of the things that you claimed I said.

You invent imaginary people.

You invent imaginary arguments.

I know why you are doing this, as well. Because it's easier to argue against imaginary people than real people.

I remember the /online command showing 500 players online. OP is wrong. /threadclosed