Over 430 threads discussing labyrinth problems with over 1040 posters in support DONE!!!!!

"

qwqwqw333_final wrote:

IDK if you are trolling or not, but you are de facto insulting our intelligence by trying to explain that the sky is blue.

We are like way past that, it doesn't makes a difference how it ends.

We've known for long.

Huh?

If someone requires convincing before he will believe that the sky is blue, the person doing the convincing is hardly insulting his intelligence.

In any case, I am not interested in convincing Shovelcut of anything. But I happily call out bullshit when I see it, because it prevents people from having any meaningful discussion.

I'm going to request this thread to be locked. It's been nothing but back and forth accusations and mud throwing for the last 20+ pages and Lab isn't going to change anyway.

This is not doing anyone any good anymore.

The only real claim I've made about the list of account names is from the OP,

"

The purpose of this list is not meant to "tag" anyone into any particular camp. It is meant primarily to demonstrate that many people have things about labyrinth that they think can be improved upon. Unlike the false assertions by some that have argued against any need to fix this problem there are far more than the 5, 10, or 20 that they incorrectly asserted have posted in support of changes. This list blows those silly assertions out of the water.

This is the reason I think that Zaludoz originally created and posted the thread on September 14 when the thread list count was at 248 and account names in the list was 582. When the thread list count got to 265 threads I decided to try to keep the list up to date. There have been many paranoid people like Shovelcut that have falsely speculated that a handful of people are responsible for all of the posts saying that labryinth has problems. The purpose of the account name list is to show this assertion as false. Lagwin made the assertion something along the lines that "Have you proven that all threads in the list are not alt accounts so that we can know that the list isn't made up of a just a handful of people". I responded yes and gave the description of what the analysis of each thread showing that less than 4% of the accounts on the list were created prior to the release of labyrinth. Since the only way I saw that such a conspiracy would be reasonably possible is if someone was able to create alt accounts after release of the labyrinth.

Shovelcut attacked and said I couldn't claim outlandish things. He apparently got stuck on Lagwin's first phrase when stating his theory "Have you proven that all threads in the list are not alt accounts so that we can know that the list isn't made up of a just a handful of people" and became fixated on the first half of the statement instead of the conclusion of the statement. When I later asked him if it was just a misunderstanding and he had misunderstood I think his response was something along the lines of no I'm being deceitful. Shovelcut is just plain lying when he claims that I said "I don't like the laby. Neither does this list of people I have here, and someone gave me the idea that they believed there were alt accounts posting on the subject. I have gone through every account and determined beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are only 3 or 4 alts. My analysis is irrefutable. That is a bullshit lie and proves how full of shit this man is." Plain and simple, Shovelcut is plain lying.

lie #1 I say that the list represents people that agree the labyrinth needs to be fixed/changed/improved.
lie #2 I said there were maybe 3 or 4 obvious alt accounts and gave the example of someone posting from an account that was created December 20, 2016. The beyond a shadow of a doubt is just more of Shovelcut's despicable lies. There is no proof that these 3 or 4 accounts are duplicates for people already in the list. I even sent a PM to the fellow with the December creation date asking if he was already on the list as a different account name.
lie #3 I never saidd my analysis is irrefutable, just more of Shovelcut's despicable lies. I did claim that it was proven that it is more than a handful of people represented by the list. Shovelcut apparently disagrees and talked about irrelevant things like not being able to tell the difference between an alt account and a non alt account and so it's impossible to say that there aren't many hundreds of alt accounts in the list and there's only a handful of people actually represented by the list. When I ask why would anyone have 100's of alt accounts squirreled away with posts from them prior to labyrinth release he has no answer. The only thing he's said recently new about it is that he thinks it is just me and not a conspiracy.

He ignores that Zaludoz created the original list. Let's look at his profile.

Avatar
Zaludoz

Joined:
Apr 3, 2014

Last Visited:
Jan 6, 2017

Total Forum Posts:
82 (0.08 posts per day)

23 of the posts were made prior to the release of labyrinth. According to Shovelcut, he'd probably say you can't say that Zaludoz is not my alt account. I think you can very reasonable discard that as completely unreasonable. I'll let the reader decide though on their own. One could easily compare Zaludoz list of 582 and look at the 117 account names that I added to it and see if there are any strange things. Shovelcut won't do that. He'd rather cast vague aspersions and dabble in partially formed conspiracy theories.

The point is that the main point of the list is to prove that it is not only a small handful of people posting. Other people have made that accusation not just Shovelcut. Shovelcut just seems to be latest caught up into the paranoid fantasy.

"

Xavathos wrote:

I'm going to request this thread to be locked. It's been nothing but back and forth accusations and mud throwing for the last 20+ pages and Lab isn't going to change anyway.

This is not doing anyone any good anymore.

I cannot disagree, but a request for a thread lock by someone who is

A. not the thread's author

and

B. an outspoken opponent of that thread's message

is tasteless at best (if not abusive of the reporting function). And that's being kind to you.

Based on those two facts alone, your request will likely be denied by GGG.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

"

Xavathos wrote:

I'm going to request this thread to be locked. It's been nothing but back and forth accusations and mud throwing for the last 20+ pages and Lab isn't going to change anyway.

This is not doing anyone any good anymore.

I cannot disagree, but a request for a thread lock by someone who is

A. not the thread's author

and

B. an outspoken opponent of that thread's message

is tasteless at best. And that's being kind to you.

Based on those two facts alone, your request will likely be denied by GGG.

What's that? Was that the word "likely" being used? You're learning! Good. That's good.

I'm not even expecting GGG to read this thread, let alone my request, but I'm doing it for more that reason alone. You see, when someone is pointing out that things are getting out of hand and should stop, in a neutral way like I did, the ones causing it are far more likely to stop than if I said something more directly opposing.

So locked or not, the effect is the sonewhat achieved. At very least the message got through. ;)

"

There is nothing blameworthy about not understanding something, including the point of this thread (enumerated in the OP). People misunderstand things all the time (and I am no exception, for the record).

The number 1 issue, is that it is not too clear what this thread should do.

It is essentially a collection of lab complaints. Those complaints might be valid or not, and the thing is that depends entirely on the individual complaint. To make things worse this thread uses complaints to which GGG already reacted, which a) proofs that they do care about those complaints and b) means that those complaints don't actually fit any of the points this thread has and are just included for volume.

If someone makes a thread about Trials being obnoxious, not rewarding and very repetitive, this is fine. And it is a solid base for discussion because it is something I do believe GGG can improve upon. With 3.0 we could actually get our first 2 ascendancies just for doing all 6 Trials, because why not, we have 2 spare with one less difficulty, but we could also just learn the traps in the normal difficulty lab and add checkpoints into this first lab and hand out 4 points there, again a reasonable approach.

If someone makes a thread that Uber trials are too random and unnecessarily block entrance to the uber lab it is also something that can be discussed and making trials biased towards the ones you are missing or adding Prohpecies that spawn specific trials would be a solution to that.

So the issues of this thread are:

a) That the different threads are sometimes about opposing ideals, someone complaining about not having access is not necessarily in the same camp as someone making a thread called "Lab sucks"

b) That someone making a thread about bugged layouts or having to do the trials on every character in a league might not have any other beef with the lab and could even be enjoying it after those things were fixed

c) Even someone complaining about a still existing issues like the having to do those trials at all might still not mind the lab

So overall the huge amount of different oppinions of which many are likely present in those collected thread might mean that forming one agenda out of them is just outright impossible there could be:

a) People that just hate the lab
b) People that dislike Trials, but like the lab
c) People that dislike the hardcore aspect of the lab
d) People that want certain specific improvements (like more reliable enchants)
e) People that raised critical issues that were actually adressed

And even within those that just generally like the trap there are multiple people

a) People that like it because Izaro is too hard for having only one try, but don't mind the traps
b) People that dislike Traps, but enjoy or don't mind Izaro
c) People that feel the lab is too long
d) People that die to trash mobs in the lab (well actually there might be only one, but it is too funny not to include)
e) People that are not even really able to name what they don't like

And even the ones not having any agenda with the lab are vastly split

a) People that enjoy the lab
b) People that don't mind it's flaws
c) People that simply don't give a shit (those are the ones not participating at all in any discussion)
d) People that feel that GGG will improve on it like they did in the past
and propably a few others

Making one thread and fit all of them in there is just stupid, because even if you add all those people in the OP together you will likely not get a cohesive message. This thread actually might even be a distraction to the fixable issues the lab does have.

My main issue with it is that I spend 30-40 minutes running this lab only to die and have nothing to show. No loot, lost XP, it absolutely sucks. At least give me a couple chances if I do stuff up, the XP loss is already enough.

"

heyimsu wrote:

My main issue with it is that I spend 30-40 minutes running this lab only to die and have nothing to show. No loot, lost XP, it absolutely sucks. At least give me a couple chances if I do stuff up, the XP loss is already enough.

Heyimsu, thank you for posting your feedback. Not having any portals or checkpoints is a common complaint in the labyrinth shared by many. It's the only part of the game that behaves like this and it really increases the frustration in the labyrinth because it puts a dark cloud over the whole experience knowing that if one dies or is disconnected that the whole horrible experience has to be started over from the beginning.

One thing I did to show my displeasure to GGG was that I stopped donating money and have not donated a dime to GGG since they introduced the labyrinth in 2.2.

I've added you to the list of people that feel that the labyrinth should be changed/improved/changed/fixed. You're the 700th account name added to the list. As the list grows longer our voices get stronger.

There are some silly people on the forum that indicated I'm making up this list and that it only represents a handful of people running hundreds of accounts. To try and help them recover from their paranoia I'll copy your profile information here.

Joined:
Jan 26, 2013

Last Visited:
Jan 9, 2017

Total Forum Posts:
5 (0 posts per day)

You have high level characters, an account creation date prior to the release of labyrinth, you've made a financial contribution to earn a supporter title, and you have 3 posts prior to the release of labyrinth. These are all strong indicators that you are not my alt account (as the most recent peddler of the conspiracy theory seemed to indicate that it was just me running this whole conspiracy on my own). I can safely assert that you are not an alt account and represent yourself as a separate person on the list. I hope that people believing in such silly fantastical conspiracy theories can soon start the healing process for their own good.

I'm glad to see the list continuing to be updated.

The original point of my addition to this thread, was to counter the absurd claims that some had made, that only a handful of posters wanted changes to the Labyrinth (max suggested was like 20 or so). I wanted to blow that claim out of the water by personally going through the threads that had been posted up to the point when I made my list, and collecting names of people who had issues with the Labyrinth and wanted change (whether they like the Labyrinth or not was not considered when placed in this context.)

The benefit of this thread is to show GGG that there are issues with the Labyrinth that need to be addressed. Everything is not "OK", and it shouldn't just be ignored while they move on to work on more new features of the game, like they have done so many times in the past.

There are many aspects of the Labyrinth system in general that have been pointed out. Some HAVE been addressed, others ignored. It is beneficial to have a record kept of all Labyrinth issues.

Some that were addressed lead to people enjoying the Labyrinth more. If the ignored issues can be addressed, even more would be happy. (many suggestions would not negatively impact those who want no change, unless they financially benefit from people not liking the Labyrinth.)


I hope something changes with the acquisition of Ascendancy Points, soon. I've stopped playing until then. (my suggestion is in my post history and the big thread on that subject)

"

Turtledove wrote:

Shovelcut is just plain lying when he claims that I said "I don't like the laby. Neither does this list of people I have here, and someone gave me the idea that they believed there were alt accounts posting on the subject. I have gone through every account and determined beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are only 3 or 4 alts. My analysis is irrefutable. That is a bullshit lie and proves how full of shit this man is." Plain and simple, Shovelcut is plain lying.

Oh so gibbous can condense the conversation in a half truth kind of way but if I do it I'm just a bald faced liar? Yeah ok.

"

gibbousmoon wrote:

Turtledove: I don't like broccoli. Neither does this list of people I have here.

"

Turtledove wrote:

lie #2 I said there were maybe 3 or 4 obvious alt accounts and gave the example of someone posting from an account that was created December 20, 2016. The beyond a shadow of a doubt is just more of Shovelcut's despicable lies. There is no proof that these 3 or 4 accounts are duplicates for people already in the list.

And then you responded to lagwin and gave the impression that by you going thru all the accounts and marking them based on creation date and supporter packs, that you could tell if they were alts or not. Your reply directly implies that you have confirmed it's 690 different accounts.

"

Turtledove wrote:

One could easily compare Zaludoz list of 582 and look at the 117 account names that I added to it and see if there are any strange things. Shovelcut won't do that. He'd rather cast vague aspersions and dabble in partially formed conspiracy theories.

Why would I want to do that to begin with? Looking at a list of account names would be a pointless endeavor for any of us players.
*looks at list of names*
Yep, can't tell shit from looking at it. Might as well be looking at random pages in the phone book.

"

Turtledove wrote:

The point is that the main point of the list is to prove that it is not only a small handful of people posting. Other people have made that accusation not just Shovelcut. Shovelcut just seems to be latest caught up into the paranoid fantasy.

You know, at the beginning I may have said it's just a handful of people. But then I went thru every single fucking thread you linked and made my own list of people that posted, as proof to both you and I that there is without a doubt no way that it's a handful of people. So continuing to act like that is what I believe is you continuing your deception.