SET FREE THE ASCENDANCY POINTS (or rework the lab) [New ascension methods/lab rework ideas]

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

- Any others?

Obviously, what we have been saying for pages (conveniently trying to avoid reading half of those pages' content, or conveniently trying to forget it there, heh ? ):
- people disliking something are much, much more likely to come and voice their opinion here (then people that do not dislike it of course, or could not be bothered). And this would appear to be a rough estimate of a 1/25th of the playerbase only.

This alone, makes your "estimate" completely invalid.

It is an extremely rare exception for people to come to the forum and use their first post ever to the forum to voice their dislike of labyrinth. In hundreds of cases it has only happened once or twice. Captain Obvious was pushing a not so obvious thing after all was he? :-)

So of all posters that complained about the lab, the ones not using their very first post absolutely didn't come to the forum to complain about anything in the first place ?
That they are posting on a daily basis and giving all kind of feedback about many things .

( Since I'm expecting you to not understand my previous sentence : Somebody using his very first post or not is utterly irrelevant here, what matters is that the drastic majority of players, and posters on the forum could not be bothered to give "positive feedback", however "negative feedback" is another story completely.
You being bling to this makes your statistical knowledge and the stats that you are using to try convincing people are completely fallacious and pointless ).


@Phrazz :
There are traps in many ( definitely not all ) platformers, it does not make traps a "platformer-only" thing, at all.
It might remind you of that genre of course, but it's also an arpg element.

"

EnjoyTheJourney wrote:

act 4 (not coincidentally, the least liked act by common consensus),

Another baseless assumption, pulled out of somebody's ***.
I heard people also saying that they did like the fighting the bosses related to the lore, that they like the atmosphere of some areas ( @Daresso ).
People always complain globally when a first content comes out if it offers some difficulty, which is does.
People where bitching when Dominus came out.
And people where bitching when a4 came out.
And people will be bitching about the new bosses being "too OP", "too melee punishing", etc ...

"

Phrazz wrote:

I'm just having a hard time believing, experiencing and seeing that the lab is "vastly liked". And no, it's not based on this thread :)

See ? you also are having a hard time believing some things :)
Besides I don't think that anyone said that it was "vastly" liked, I don't think that you can have actual challenging content that is "vastly liked" in poe with the "new" population anyway, people like easy loot, going in a straigthline with not too much effort, because that's what GGG got them used too .... ( I enjoy that sometimes too, sometimes ).

"

Zaludoz wrote:

In FFX, gaining the ultimate weapons that could break the damage limit per hit, were each gated behind mini-games. I hated dodging lightning strikes, Blitzball..., dodging butterflies along a nearly 2-dimensional path where you couldn't easily see where on the path the butterflies were, dodging birds in a chocobo race, ... but then you had Yuna and Auron's capture monsters with hunting weapons and Yuna's defeat summoned monsters in battles... these were fun

I would agree only for the lightning thing, because it was just too much.
However, Blitz ball is an important part of the game, you HAVE to play Blitzball to finish the game anyway.
All of it is what part of made final fantasy great, FF7 even had some kind of "mini-games", it's nothing new, and it's just a small part of the experience, just like lab is.
Breaking the monotony is also a good thing, even if it takes players outside of their comfort zone.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

Obviously, what we have been saying for pages (conveniently trying to avoid reading half of those pages' content, or conveniently trying to forget it there, heh ? ):
- people disliking something are much, much more likely to come and voice their opinion here (then people that do not dislike it of course, or could not be bothered). And this would appear to be a rough estimate of a 1/25th of the playerbase only.

This alone, makes your "estimate" completely invalid.

It is an extremely rare exception for people to come to the forum and use their first post ever to the forum to voice their dislike of labyrinth. In hundreds of cases it has only happened once or twice. Captain Obvious was pushing a not so obvious thing after all was he? :-)

So of all posters that complained about the lab, the ones not using their very first post absolutely didn't come to the forum to complain about anything in the first place ?
That they are posting on a daily basis and giving all kind of feedback about many things .

( Since I'm expecting you to not understand my previous sentence : Somebody using his very first post or not is utterly irrelevant here, what matters is that the drastic majority of players, and posters on the forum could not be bothered to give "positive feedback", however "negative feedback" is another story completely.
You being bling to this makes your statistical knowledge and the stats that you are using to try convincing people are completely fallacious and pointless ).

There is no tabulation of positive feedback so that part of your post does not seem at all relevant to the discussion?

I have no idea what people's first typical post is when coming to the forum. I only know that it is rare for their first post to be a complaint about labyrinth. I know this because when adding someone to the list I look at their summary profile which contains their join date and total forum posts.

The argument that people are more likely to go out of their way to complain than to praise something is true and valid. This is a major problem with a voluntary survey where someone gives either their praise or complaint opinion to the survey. You are incorrectly conflating that true inclination with this completely different situation where NO ONE is being asked to praise or complain about labyrinth and praise percentages/numbers are not even be tabulated or calculated.

Instead a person in the sub set of individuals known as PoE forum posters has given their opinion of labyrinth. You then further compounded this general inaccuracy with the argument that the number should be divided by 25 because of the study where it was found that for every complainer there were 25 people that were unhappy that didn't complain. That would clearly indicate that the calculation should be MULTIPLIED by 25 to get a guess at how many people truly dislike labyrinth, instead of dividing which you argued, since for every person complaining there would expected to be 25 people that just never complained. I am not arguing that it should really be increased by x25, instead I'm mentioning this to demonstrate that you don't seem to understand mathematics very well. Which is perfectly fine. There are many extremely intelligent people that are not mathematically oriented/inclined.

Now, let's say that a large percentage of first time posts of accounts on the big list, Over 330 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 910 posters in support, are complaining about labyrinth. If that were the case then it could be a good argument that one or even both of the following things may be happening.

1. Labyrinth is really bad and people are so outraged that they come onto the forums for the first time just to voice their opinion. If this were a very large percentage of the names in the list then it might tend to cast doubt on the assertion that the group of the people posting to the forums over the past year is not really a good representation of the general population of active forum posters over the past 16 months, at least not for purposes that I have proposed using it with my "equation" to estimate the number of labyrinth "complainers" in the general population.

2. Someone is trying to manipulate the analysis by creating alt-accounts and then complaining about labyrinth in their post from that alt-account in order to artificially increase the list size.

So, here's my proposal. If you or anyone goes through the big account name list and produces a list of account names where the accounts first post was a complaint about labyrinth then I'll remove their name from the big list. If that is insufficient incentive then perhaps something else could be added? Maybe if more than half dozen names are found in this category from names I added to the list and checked the summary profile information on then I'll publicly humbly apologize for being wrong and admit that I'm a stupid loser or something?

"

J33bus wrote:

Well a quick google search on the subject actually tells me that many studies say that one complaint is worth only about 25 people regardless of population stats.

Nowhere he said that it was only applied to when doing a voluntary survey.
And it's very likely that a volutary survey would push people that would not have given positive feedback otherwise to do so, more than pushing people that would not have given negative feedback othersie to do so.
I guess J33bus might have given up on trying to explain you since he has not been following up at all for a whie.


It's mind blowing honestly.
It's very simple :
You have 1 person that comes complaining here, when 25 person don't come.
Your negative feedback is only the feedback of 1/26h of the population in this case (according to the 1for25 assumption ), that's all there is to it, your "statistics" are completely skewed unless you take such a phenomenon into account, end of the story.


Somebody using their very first post or not to QQ about the lab is not relevant here, a good chunk of the lab complainers is very likely using the forums to complains ( if they get fond of it, then maybe trying to give their suggestions or whatever, who knows ), the lab being their only complaint or not is absolutely meaningless here, irrelevant.

"

Fruz wrote:

"

J33bus wrote:

Well a quick google search on the subject actually tells me that many studies say that one complaint is worth only about 25 people regardless of population stats.

Nowhere he said that it was only applied to when doing a voluntary survey.
And it's very likely that a volutary survey would push people that would not have given positive feedback otherwise to do so, more than pushing people that would not have given negative feedback othersie to do so.
I guess J33bus might have given up on trying to explain you since he has not been following up at all for a whie.


It's mind blowing honestly.
It's very simple :
You have 1 person that comes complaining here, when 25 person don't come.
Your negative feedback is only the feedback of 1/26h of the population in this case (according to the 1for25 assumption ), that's all there is to it, your "statistics" are completely skewed unless you take such a phenomenon into account, end of the story.


Somebody using their very first post or not to QQ about the lab is not relevant here, a good chunk of the lab complainers is very likely using the forums to complains ( if they get fond of it, then maybe trying to give their suggestions or whatever, who knows ), the lab being their only complaint or not is absolutely meaningless here, irrelevant.

Hi Fruz, please see my previous post where this is already addressed.

"

Fruz wrote:

The late argument regarding the time spend, it was related to whether or not boredom kicks in ...

If boredom is your argument, perhaps you shouldn't be playing a game that almost demands repetition.

"

That other guy was just saying "people do it because they have to !"

If you're going to quote, use the full sentence, not doing so makes your arguments invalid.

...

"

PS : Hahahaha, the "actually they're not mandatory, but only when it's convenient to my argument" is golden.

They're not mandatory.

"

The optional skill points are purely carrots on stick, ( unless when discovering the game the first time maybe ), nothing more, just like the lab is, period.
Whatever you might add will not change that in anyway.

No one suggested they weren't.

"

The failure to actually understand sarcasm is also very strong,

Try harder.

"

whatever lol, I guess at this point, laughing is the best thing to do.

Seems like a good idea, especially when no one takes you seriously.

"

Kellog wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

The late argument regarding the time spend, it was related to whether or not boredom kicks in ...

If boredom is your argument, perhaps you shouldn't be playing a game that almost demands repetition.

The late argument.
It happened maybe 200 pages ago, it's not related to this case, try to not skip some words next time.
And I have never said that I was bored by the way, you trying to derail the thing with such a silly claim tells a lot.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Hi Fruz, please see my previous post where this is already addressed.

It's not.
Please try harder to understand basic statistics and maths.

You are assuming that all people not voicing their opinion do not like the lab, which is incredibly stupid, and obviously fallacious.
Let me tell you something obvious ( that some must have said before here ) that you are somehow blindly missing :
- if most people don't come here to complain, it's because either they have no reason to complain, or they do not dislike the lab enough to be bothered to come here and complain.
Either way, it's fine : none of those people are helping your crusade.

"

Kellog wrote:

No one suggested they weren't.

You did say that they weren't carrots on a stick like the lab is a carrot on a stick:
They are, both carrots on sticks, period.

"If you're going to quote, use the full sentence, not doing so makes your arguments invalid. "
My argument however wasn't because I actually just summarized what you said.

You should try harder to, but since I'm in a good mood I guess, I will try to explain you ( even though it's already a waste of time ) :

"

Kellog wrote:

"

Those are also brilliant educated guesses, aren't they ?

Not really.

Are you telling me that you didn't spot the sarcasm at all, or that you didn't understand that those "brilliant educated guess" where put in parralel to yours ?

Those "brilliant educated guesses", was a sarcasm to say that the "guess" that I used was stupid, almost as much as yours that I quoted right after.
I cannot make it more simple than this, if you still don't understand, there is a problem elsewhere.


Gosh I should know better to ignore some of the trolls here :/

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Hi Fruz, please see my previous post where this is already addressed.

It's not.
Please try harder to understand basic statistics and maths.

You are assuming that all people not voicing their opinion do not like the lab, which is incredibly stupid, and obviously fallacious.
Let me tell you something obvious ( that some must have said before here ) that you are somehow blindly missing :
- if most people don't come here to complain, it's because either they have no reason to complain, or they do not dislike the lab enough to be bothered to come here and complain.
Either way, it's fine : none of those people are helping your crusade.

Fruz, please try harder to not be so insulting.

There is no assumption or assertion as to who or how many likes the labyrinth. It is incredibly rude, stupid, and fallacious of you to accuse me of making assumptions which have not been made. You have repeated this brain dead ridiculous assertion multiple times even though I keep denying it. Yet you continue to neglect to even pretend to support your silly accusation instead you just continue your insults. I guess it must be late enough in the evening so that your personality has made its transformation?

Don't you remember already what you wrote ?

"

Turtledove wrote:

That would clearly indicate that the calculation should be MULTIPLIED by 25 to get a guess at how many people truly dislike labyrinth, instead of dividing which you argued, since for every person complaining there would expected to be 25 people that just never complained. I am not arguing that it should really be increased by x25, instead I'm mentioning this to demonstrate that you don't seem to understand mathematics very well.

Hint : you are the rude person here, and definitely the one that has troubles understanding how statistics work, and also maths of course.
The "really" part really shows that you do think that a big chunk of those not complaining are "lab haters" or something.

By the way, you trying to find "personality issues" is [removed by Fruz] at best, and it's not late night here at all btw.


I'm giving up on trying to explain you stuff regarding this ( maybe regarding other things, all related to maths and statistics would probably be what I should do tbh ).

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Kellog wrote:

"

Fruz wrote:

The late argument regarding the time spend, it was related to whether or not boredom kicks in ...

If boredom is your argument, perhaps you shouldn't be playing a game that almost demands repetition.

The late argument.
It happened maybe 200 pages ago, it's not related to this case, try to not skip some words next time.
And I have never said that I was bored by the way,

Perhaps you need to be more specific. Making random statements, without context, isn't helping anyone.

"

you trying to derail the thing

I'm not trying to derail anything.

"

with such a silly claim tells a lot.

You really need to stop projecting.

"

Kellog wrote:

You did say that they weren't carrots on a stick like the lab is a carrot on a stick:They are, both carrots on sticks, period.

What I actually said was:

"

I don't imagine many familiar with arpg type games consider 'carrot and stick' type game play anything but natural. However, collecting a point on the way to Act end is a completely different prospect to specifically leaving the game to spend time running a side show. Especially when said excursion is tedious and not terribly enjoyable.

"

My argument however wasn't because I actually just summarized what you said.

You purposely tried to misquote me. Don't do it again please.

"

You should try harder to, but since I'm in a good mood I guess, I will try to explain you ( even though it's already a waste of time ) :

Whataboutism is so unbecoming.

"

Gosh I should know better to ignore some of the trolls here :/

Okay, works for me :)

"

Fruz wrote:

Don't you remember already what you wrote ?

"

Turtledove wrote:

That would clearly indicate that the calculation should be MULTIPLIED by 25 to get a guess at how many people truly dislike labyrinth, instead of dividing which you argued, since for every person complaining there would expected to be 25 people that just never complained. I am not arguing that it should really be increased by x25, instead I'm mentioning this to demonstrate that you don't seem to understand mathematics very well.

Hint : you are the rude person here, and definitely the one that has troubles understanding how statistics work, and also maths of course.
The "really" part really shows that you do think that a big chunk of those not complaining are "lab haters" or something.

By the way, you trying to find "personality issues" is [removed by Fruz] at best, and it's not late night here at all btw.


I'm giving up on trying to explain you stuff regarding this ( maybe regarding other things, all related to maths and statistics would probably be what I should do tbh ).

If you think that is a quote referring to some assumption that I'm making about people liking labyrinth then you are mistaken. It is not.

The study was that for every person that complained there would be 25 people with the same complaint but just never bothered to complain. Therefore that would mean that for every person that complained about labyrinth there would 25 more people would have the same complaint but just never bothered to complain. That means multiplying by 25 NOT dividing by 25. This seems to be another example that indicates you don't have a knack for mathematics.