Flanker wrote: » Dygz wrote: » Flanker wrote: » Appreciate your detailed explanation about something that I never actually suggested. You did suggest what I said you suggested here:If you can't compehend a simple fact that someone who plays 6/h day will reach the level cap faster than someone who play 3h/day, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES, 50 or 5000 hours - you shouldn't have missed the Math classes in your Elementary school. That obviously has to be about DAYS rather than HOURS because if it's 225 hours to max Adventurer Level it doesn't matter how many DAYS it takes. Casual Time v Hardcore Time is irrelevant. It will take the Casual Time player 225 hours. It will take the Hardcore Time player 225 hours. Buddy, what are you even talking about? I'm responsbile for what I say. I'm not responsible for 100 possible interpretations of my words. You completely missed the point that I made and instead, you talk about some "days" that I never even mentioned. Like, what? And of course, your fangirl will like anything you say as long as it is you disagreeing with me.
Dygz wrote: » Flanker wrote: » Appreciate your detailed explanation about something that I never actually suggested. You did suggest what I said you suggested here:If you can't compehend a simple fact that someone who plays 6/h day will reach the level cap faster than someone who play 3h/day, NO MATTER HOW LONG IT TAKES, 50 or 5000 hours - you shouldn't have missed the Math classes in your Elementary school. That obviously has to be about DAYS rather than HOURS because if it's 225 hours to max Adventurer Level it doesn't matter how many DAYS it takes. Casual Time v Hardcore Time is irrelevant. It will take the Casual Time player 225 hours. It will take the Hardcore Time player 225 hours.
Flanker wrote: » Appreciate your detailed explanation about something that I never actually suggested.
Zehlan wrote: » It's funny how you only understand what you want to understand and divert and deflect facts or play ignorant on anything you cannot.
Flanker wrote: » Zehlan wrote: » It's funny how you only understand what you want to understand and divert and deflect facts or play ignorant on anything you cannot. I just debunked your bs above and the only thing you're capable of now is parroting the same nonsense, trying to accuse me in something you are actually doing yourself. RIP
Zehlan wrote: » You haven't said anything to debunk what i have said or Dygz you have just played victim and are trying to deflect the conversation.
Flanker wrote: » I'm responsbile for what I say. I'm not responsible for 100 possible interpretations of my words. You completely missed the point that I made and instead, you talk about some "days" that I never even mentioned.
Dygz wrote: » You are responsible for what you say. Yes. I dunno how you cannot have mentioned "days" when you wrote:"Someone who plays 6/h day will reach the level cap faster than someone who play 3h/day." Are you saying those are not your words? If someone misinterprets your meaning because of your poor choice of words, you should be able to clarify by rephrasing/reframing. That's the way discussion works. If you aren't interested in clarifying your perspective - that's fine. It's a free world.
Flanker wrote: » You can't say anything constructive yourself, you can't provide any data to support your point, you can't handle a proper discussion
Zehlan wrote: » Leveling Speed Discussion Wiki states the following: On release the developers anticipate max level should be attainable in approximately 45 days if playing 4-6 hours per day. This is equivalent to approximately 225 hours to reach level 50. What is your opinion on this? Would you prefer it to be faster, slower, or keep it as it is? Why? Closed • 557 total votes 139 Slower306 <---- Majority Keep it as it is 112 Faster I am sure the faster crowd will join the 306 who voted keep it as is before they would ever join the slower crowd. So that means 418 vs 139 it is basic math and you can try and do your deceptive spin of maybe there was a full moon , a solar eclipse was happening, it was high tide and people weren't thinking correctly or to sum your own words I was going to do a big posts quoting etc so I went and reread reddit with the poll and you know what i saw little flanker_YouTube posting in the thread and even back then you were around for that poll and you still lost out lmfao. So you knew what people wanted from that poll all along how deceptive lol How many more threads are you going to make? I knew i smelt a weasel.
Zehlan wrote: » Flanker wrote: » You can't say anything constructive yourself, you can't provide any data to support your point, you can't handle a proper discussion Zehlan wrote: » Leveling Speed Discussion Wiki states the following: On release the developers anticipate max level should be attainable in approximately 45 days if playing 4-6 hours per day. This is equivalent to approximately 225 hours to reach level 50. What is your opinion on this? Would you prefer it to be faster, slower, or keep it as it is? Why? Closed • 557 total votes 139 Slower306 <---- Majority Keep it as it is 112 Faster I am sure the faster crowd will join the 306 who voted keep it as is before they would ever join the slower crowd. So that means 418 vs 139 it is basic math and you can try and do your deceptive spin of maybe there was a full moon , a solar eclipse was happening, it was high tide and people weren't thinking correctly or to sum your own words I was going to do a big posts quoting etc so I went and reread reddit with the poll and you know what i saw little flanker_YouTube posting in the thread and even back then you were around for that poll and you still lost out lmfao. So you knew what people wanted from that poll all along how deceptive lol How many more threads are you going to make? I knew i smelt a weasel. Flanker wrote: » Now, statistics never lie, but only in case if you properly interpret it. What I mean by that is... let's say, metaphorically, that 20% of car accidents happen because of drunk driving. I means that the remaining 80% of accidents happen when the driver is sober. Does it mean that sober driving is riskier than drunk driving? Obviously not. What you need to realize, while analyzing the results of that poll: 1. The average Reddit user would have less knowledge about the game compared to the average forum user. Also, as I said previously, I highly doubt that the average voter thought about this topic seriously for at least a minute prior to clicking one of the options. 2. If you are really looking for truth, then it's crucial to take so-called "status quo bias" when it comes to a representative sampling of poll participants. For reference:A status quo bias or default bias is a cognitive bias which results from a preference for the maintenance of one's existing state of affairs. The current baseline (or status quo) is taken as a reference point, and any change from that baseline is perceived as a loss or gain. Corresponding to different alternatives, this current baseline or default option is perceived and evaluated by individuals as a positive. Status quo bias is a cognitive bias based in emotion. Change naturally invites risk, and people may be uncomfortable putting themselves in situations where the outcome is uncertain. This tendency to keep things the way they are can have a considerable effect on how people behave in virtually any aspect of life. And as I said, if you ignore the middle ground, more people actually voted for "slower" leveling compared to "faster" option 3. You look at the poll, yet you completely ignore the comments. Here are the top comments under that poll. If you want to be objective, shouldn't you take them into account?[/b]
Flanker wrote: » Now, statistics never lie, but only in case if you properly interpret it. What I mean by that is... let's say, metaphorically, that 20% of car accidents happen because of drunk driving. I means that the remaining 80% of accidents happen when the driver is sober. Does it mean that sober driving is riskier than drunk driving? Obviously not. What you need to realize, while analyzing the results of that poll: 1. The average Reddit user would have less knowledge about the game compared to the average forum user. Also, as I said previously, I highly doubt that the average voter thought about this topic seriously for at least a minute prior to clicking one of the options. 2. If you are really looking for truth, then it's crucial to take so-called "status quo bias" when it comes to a representative sampling of poll participants. For reference:A status quo bias or default bias is a cognitive bias which results from a preference for the maintenance of one's existing state of affairs. The current baseline (or status quo) is taken as a reference point, and any change from that baseline is perceived as a loss or gain. Corresponding to different alternatives, this current baseline or default option is perceived and evaluated by individuals as a positive. Status quo bias is a cognitive bias based in emotion. Change naturally invites risk, and people may be uncomfortable putting themselves in situations where the outcome is uncertain. This tendency to keep things the way they are can have a considerable effect on how people behave in virtually any aspect of life. And as I said, if you ignore the middle ground, more people actually voted for "slower" leveling compared to "faster" option 3. You look at the poll, yet you completely ignore the comments. Here are the top comments under that poll. If you want to be objective, shouldn't you take them into account?[/b]
Flanker wrote: » If you think that statistical data analysis only requires looking at numbers without understanding the nature of the sampling and interpreting the obtained data in a proper way, I'd give you a friendly advice to never touch this topic ever again
Flanker wrote: » If someone plays 6h/day, he will reach the level cap faster than someone who plays 3h/day. This should be obvious, right?
Flanker wrote: » As well as the fact that it doesn't matter whether leveling takes 50 or 5000 hours. 6h/day player will still reach it faster than 3h/day play in both cases.
Flanker wrote: » Will it take less days? Well, yeah, apprarently it will, unless leveling takes 3 or less hours, because in this case both would achieve it within 1 day.
Zehlan wrote: » Well son lets see what you got 1. hypotheses 2. sample data 3. descriptive data summery 4. how have you tested your hypotheses 5. I already know what your gonna say it is the data all points to Mao Flanker knowing best but lets see it in writing anyway. Oh i want charts and graphs please as well since your an expert. This sounds like a lot more fun than you just talking to hear your own head roar!
Dygz wrote: » I didn't misunderstand anything. I disagree that 6h/day v 3h/day is relevant.
Flanker wrote: » Zehlan wrote: » Well son lets see what you got 1. hypotheses 2. sample data 3. descriptive data summery 4. how have you tested your hypotheses 5. I already know what your gonna say it is the data all points to Mao Flanker knowing best but lets see it in writing anyway. Oh i want charts and graphs please as well since your an expert. This sounds like a lot more fun than you just talking to hear your own head roar! Glad you finally found a website called google. Accept my sincere congratulations. Thank you for proving my point that "just looking at numbers" is not enough and debunking the point you made earlier. To all those who might be reading this, let me explain which trick this individual is attempting to use. I pointed out that his interpretation of the poll results can't be considered valid due to the way that interpretation was made: it focused exclusively on the part that aligned with his personal preferences on this subject while completely, I repeat, COMPLETELY ignoring the parts that didn't (such as numerous people saying that they would prefer longer leveling in this thread, as well basically all most upvoted comments on Reddit under that poll and people who actually upvoted them). This is a perfect example of deliberate cherry picking and confirmation bias. The fact that this human being keeps ignoring that knowingly and intentionally allows us to make a valid conclusion that he is not looking for the actual truth, he is not thinking what will be better for the game, he is not willing to analyze everything properly - he only wants the game to be the way he personally wants it to be. Now, he posted a list and it is pretty obvious that if we follow that list, we'd have problems on step 2 already. It is obvious to anyone with a barely functioning brain that we can't use that method because of lack of statistical data. And even this individual understands it. But what he is trying to do is basically to say "Oh, you can't do it, which means you are wrong". Nobody can dude, because we only have limited information and this pathetic attempt to prove your point at least somehow will have no success. P.S. And even if all that was possible, you'd still make up a reason to claim that it is all wrong because, as I said, you are only interested in making the game meet your personal preferences.
Flanker wrote: » Therefore, YOU want to make the game meet YOUR personal preferences, instead of thinking what is better for the game OVERALL - which is what I am doing or, at least, trying to do
Zehlan wrote: » but for the person who has work, kids, wife aggro, the people who are the average players it does and the game is already going to put enough pressure on those casual players you don't need to pile on more. If you were as smart as you think you are you would of already figured that out.
Zehlan wrote: » for the person who has work, kids, wife aggro, the people who are the average players it does and the game is already going to put enough pressure on those casual players you don't need to pile on more.
Noaani wrote: » Zehlan wrote: » for the person who has work, kids, wife aggro, the people who are the average players it does and the game is already going to put enough pressure on those casual players you don't need to pile on more. Keep in mind, Ashes is not being made for the average gamer. It is being made for Steven. Steven is a gamer who will use his millions of dollars to get a guild that is basically fanatical, and will do what ever he asks them to do in game, because they want money from him (note, a number of staff at Intrepid are guild mates of his). That is why this game is built top down - that is how Steven seems MMORPG's. Steven is used to "the little people" just being there, because that is what he knows. He probably doesn't even realise that this is how things have been for him because those people wanted money from him, not because they were enjoying the gameplay experience they were getting. This is why I have spent years arguing on these forums. My arguments have all been around the notion that this game needs to be more aimed at the average gamer, not at Steven. If you look back at any argument I have ever found myself in on these forums, it has been about me trying to get this game to focus less on the type of gameplay Steven thinks is what makes an MMORPG, and more in to the type of gameplay my understanding of the average MMORPG player would expect.
Myosotys wrote: » Noaani wrote: » Zehlan wrote: » for the person who has work, kids, wife aggro, the people who are the average players it does and the game is already going to put enough pressure on those casual players you don't need to pile on more. Keep in mind, Ashes is not being made for the average gamer. It is being made for Steven. Steven is a gamer who will use his millions of dollars to get a guild that is basically fanatical, and will do what ever he asks them to do in game, because they want money from him (note, a number of staff at Intrepid are guild mates of his). That is why this game is built top down - that is how Steven seems MMORPG's. Steven is used to "the little people" just being there, because that is what he knows. He probably doesn't even realise that this is how things have been for him because those people wanted money from him, not because they were enjoying the gameplay experience they were getting. This is why I have spent years arguing on these forums. My arguments have all been around the notion that this game needs to be more aimed at the average gamer, not at Steven. If you look back at any argument I have ever found myself in on these forums, it has been about me trying to get this game to focus less on the type of gameplay Steven thinks is what makes an MMORPG, and more in to the type of gameplay my understanding of the average MMORPG player would expect. This is about your imagination and naive interpretation. The reality is you don't know shit about what Steven will do.
