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

"

Shovelcut wrote:

"

Zaludoz wrote:

Have been Actively Against change:
Shovelcut

I've made myself clear in the past that I'm not against any changes so long as it leaves the laby intact with the ascendancy points still behind it. If there is a way to change it to make it more acceptable for people with high ping, I'm fully behind that.

What I am against is having it changed simply because a small portion of the playerbase finds it boring or not fun.

"SMALL PORTION"

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

HAHAHAHAHAHA

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA

You can laugh all you laugh thinking blindly that you guys are sooo numerous.
The lab is going to stay, because ... well it is connected the the fact that I used "blindly" in the previous sentence.

Cheers

"You can laugh all you laugh"


LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH





AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHA



Someone so triggered that cant even type right.


LOOOOOOOOOOOOL

So misstyping is being triggered now ?
/lol
Also looking at your message, this situation is very ironic I have to say.
It is funny, but not because of the reasons that you think make it so.

"

Fruz wrote:

So misstyping is being triggered now ?
/lol
Also looking at your message, this situation is very ironic I have to say.
It is funny, but not because of the reasons that you think make it so.

You know what?

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

mark1030 wrote:

If you're going to use that list, change "582 different people" to "582 different accounts". We all know some people posted with more than one account in some of those threads.

I looked and it says accounts? The update on the OP update is 9:21 which is well before your post. I do appreciate your suggestion though. I remember fixing a typo immediately after posting so maybe your suggestion is something that I also fixed then??? I really don't remember for sure. :-) (BTW, I only know of one person that has probably posted with more than one account.)

Could be, turtledove. I didn't go back and read what you added to the op. I was referring to the post that referred to "people" and you quoted that saying you were going to add it. So you probably changed it when you added it.

My post was for factual reasons only, to put things into real perspective, instead of random numbers being thrown around to make the issue seem smaller than it is. (I was suprised by the results because of how many conversations were conducted primarily between the two active groups at the top, drowning out most of the smaller voices, which is why I made those lists)

I did not relate these numbers to how many people this translates into the game, or if it should change the "minority" status given to those who want change... just a fact of how many people on the forums were for changes. To prevent some of the more "opponent-like" people out there, I left their names off the list of those supporting change, because I felt they might feel wrongly categorized, and that didn't work out so well, I guess.

I didn't even villify anyone as an "enemy of the state", I simply made a list of those actively against changes that were presented. I didn't take the time to list how angry anyone was, or to what extent a person may be for or against which individual topics... though I considered it to avoid these sorts of comments against it. I just didn't want to put that much work into it. I probably should have constructed a list of unique posters who were against change too... but I'll leave that up to someone else. The sides may very well be fairly equally represented on these message boards, that I don't know.

I left off many names in the pro-change big-list, due to the nature of their posts' comments being about Izaro or the enchant system, though they are technically part of the labyrinth discussion, simply to not over-inflate numbers in a controversial way.

I have nothing to say about the posting from multiple accounts, as I don't personally have a way of determining that fact, and it seemed inconsequential due to the number of posts I discounted anyway, and the number of people who have commented that many of their friends have left the game due to the labyrinth, or that people have come back because of it.

I'm not here to argue, just to present a better perspective of the issue. There are many people who want Labyrinth changes made, it's not a small group of 5 over-zealous people spamming the boards, that's the perspective that I see clearly from my research here.

"

mark1030 wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

mark1030 wrote:

If you're going to use that list, change "582 different people" to "582 different accounts". We all know some people posted with more than one account in some of those threads.

I looked and it says accounts? The update on the OP update is 9:21 which is well before your post. I do appreciate your suggestion though. I remember fixing a typo immediately after posting so maybe your suggestion is something that I also fixed then??? I really don't remember for sure. :-) (BTW, I only know of one person that has probably posted with more than one account.)

Could be, turtledove. I didn't go back and read what you added to the op. I was referring to the post that referred to "people" and you quoted that saying you were going to add it. So you probably changed it when you added it.

Okay, mystery solved. Thank you. When one is getting as old as me, one can worry about starting to lose one's memory. My typo fix BTW was "list" -> "lists". :-)

"

Zaludoz wrote:

and the number of people who have commented that many of their friends have left the game due to the labyrinth

Tying this back to my anecdotal evidence post, this is where anecdotal evidence crosses the line from evidence into conjecture. So, I think it is good that we stay on the side of evidence as much as possible. For example, having a hard list of threads is evidence that can be checked and used by others. You checked and used the list to come up with a list of all the people posting in the threads. Previously someone else used the list to do an analysis of the thread authors. Just some examples that anecdotal evidence is valid and useful evidence when done properly.

Another interesting statistic that seems to come out of this analysis is that it appears that about twice as many people post without ever starting a new thread as people starting a new thread. Prior to the analysis I would have guessed something like five times as many?

"

Another interesting statistic that seems to come out of this analysis is that it appears that about twice as many people post without ever starting a new thread as people starting a new thread. Prior to the analysis I would have guessed something like five times as many?

So you are really surprised that 33% start a new thread instead of at least checking the first page if a thread for the same topic is already present... that is rather optimistic.

"

Oh, wow. This cult is sinking even lower now... Profiling forum posters, making lists of "patriots" & "enemies of the state"... hahaha :))

Let me briefly note why the anti-Lab movement is a complete failure and why will GGG keep dismissing it as a "vocal minority":

* posting obnoxious non-feedback (200+ threads of spam & flaming)
* agressive behaviour toward posters who counter your Lab complaints
* glaring usage of alternate accounts, to "prove your numbers" & spam the forums
* constant bumping / spamming / duplicating threads
* for the most part a complete lack of arguments ("Lab sucks" is not an argument)

You are doing a disservice to your cause and alienating people who would otherwise be neutral (like me), to come and counter your BS.

Carry on.

Yeah there are actually 5 points that make a certain points. I mean I can observe aggressive behavior on both sides, but that is not the point. If you don't want to make a point, it doesn't really make a difference if you are aggressive or not. If you want to make a point, you should do that in a polite way.

So here are two statistics you should do for your list:

a) List the amount of Threads, that use words like Fuck, Suck, Garbage, Crap or are in any other way the total opposite of constructive.

b) List the amount of Threads in which the initial post is actually positive and not negative. I mean look at this thread https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1706797, he said he doesn't like the Lab but the Uber lab is totally fine and doable and he will farm it... that is incredible negative

I also don't know how you qualify that a thread intended to discuss problems with the labyrinth, I give you a totally cool example (the benefit of your list is that I don't have to search for them):

"

It's the beginning of the end!

I've seen this so many times. A big game dev makes a stupid decision, and suddenly a "vocal minority" starts to complain like hell. It seems OK for a while, but sooner or later within a couple of years, the mass exodus of players takes a toll and the game is considered dead. Mark my words.

First the Labyrinth wasn't even mentioned, neither are any problems or concerns it is... I'm not even sure how to categorize is. If someone makes a Thread saying "Lab is so bad" you would expect to read something about the lab in there... but not really.

And if you want another Statistic... I guess this guy made 6 or 7 threads all by himself... none of them had any reasoning.


So instead of counting threads which might or might not have anything to say about the labyrinth (or even compliment it) a better idea would be to actually answer some more decisive questions about what is actually bad.

If the Lab is boring than that is fine, because honestly this is true for more parts of the game and they are all even more mandatory than the lab, because you have to move through them. Basically all of normal is pretty boring. Low mob density, low movespeed and lack of supports or skills you want to use makes it not that fun, exspecially when you have played a lvl80 char running through maps before. So boring might have been an argument to not implement the lab in the first place but since its there, it is not really worth to put any more effort in, exspecially if only the traps are boring, which are a rather small part of the lab.

Or is the lab too hard? Well you can overlevel two parts massively and even merc is a joke with lvl70+. Maybe just traps are too hard... which again is odd if they are also boring, they are also easy to skip with movement skills, only the uber lab has some harder gauntlets.

Or maybe because Traps Ignore defenses? Maybe like Spells ignore Evasion, Physical Hits ignore resistances, Chaos Damage ignores Energy Shield or Elemental Damage ignores Armor? Yes having life ignored is odd, but honestly it is good. Right now Life is basically the number one stat and the lab didn't even fix that, because it doesn't ignore life outright (if that would be the case you would be instantly dead) it simply levels it and threads all pools equally. That's new and if you want to make a low HP char to benefit from flasks to run the lab, you can do it. Same way you don't really need much Cold or Chaos Resist during the Atziri fight, just put on 2 Mings and Carnage Heart and roll over the thing and use flasks, totally valid. Specific preparations for certain things aren't new.


And honestly I shouldn't be the one giving the arguments to work with. The most obvious reason people hate it might actually be that you can't just suicide yourself through it. Which would be a valid argument, but obviously people seem to be too ashamed to actually acknowledge that the lab might provide difficulties to them.