Ogon_Dark

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm just wondering when this changed from "facing the Toughest in COH" to "Facing an enemy tuned for me to beat easier than other enemies I could have built"?

Not that I'm surprised...

[/ QUOTE ]

Link please. That's not what I can find in Smurphy's post. Unless you are talking about Keep's and my posts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I don't want to get you in trouble by actually talking to you. (Maybe you should think about how pathetic it is that people think this would actually mean something to me?)

I don't need to be quoted for the other 99% of the forums that just lurk to see the truth of a thread whose title includes the quote about fighting the "toughest in CoH".

This obviously doesn't even live up to its title.

I'm sure it won't stop the sycophants from trying to hand wave away the difference. Do carry on with your worship.

I'm just wondering when this changed from "facing the Toughest in COH" to "Facing an enemy tuned for me to beat easier than other enemies I could have built"?

Not that I'm surprised...

[ QUOTE ]

If I could sell something to a flipper for 10 million, and that character sold it to an end-user for 10 million, that would destroy 1 million of my inf (went fee) and another 1 million (the flipper's fee), creating a leverage factor of 2.0.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why would a flipper buy and sell something for the same 10 million Inf price?

The best I can come up with to leverage Inf to destroy Inf is to use it to artifically raise the price of some items. Even if you are running at a small loss over time, you'll be forcing other people to pay a higher price and destory more Inf than they otherwise would.

Find a recipe that is oversupplied so that it is selling near the Vendor price.

Bid just over the Vendor price, sell most of what you bring in straight to the Vendor for a small loss.

List the remainder (after judging what the average amount of sales that are made per day) for a higher price than things were going for before.

You actually will probably make a profit running this scheme, which you could plow into eliminating the excess in other oversupplied recipes and doing the same thing.

Overall though, the impact that any one player or even a group of players could have on the rate of Inf gain wil be like spitting in the ocean and not worth the trouble.

[ QUOTE ]
So what's the story with the rep badge? Was that info accurate? It sounded fishy to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, no. There are no requirements for a PvP recipe to drop other than to have a PvP kill with someone within -3 levels to yourself.

[ QUOTE ]
[Flip Picture #2 Items bought Pre-Issue 13. Obviously these pictures were edited to place the last 5 window over the description. Each item is pictured individually. Villainside


[/ QUOTE ]


Wow, it must take some pretty amazing market skillz to have known to buy all those purple recipes before I-13....

By the time it got to open beta those were all trading for at least double of what you paid. Nice work. No wonder we all worship at the altar of your maket greatness.

[ QUOTE ]
If you replace "funny" with "wrong", Fan and Ogon are the Laurel & Hardy of the market forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

I obviously was way off base to make my above statement.

[ QUOTE ]
Post Deleted by Moderator_08

[/ QUOTE ]

While I have taken exception to AF's debating style (recently we took digs at each other in one or another of the many farming threads), I know that the insults and personal attacks were present in this section before he ever got here.

The fact remains that there are a few individuals that dish out at least as much if not more bile on a daily basis, that never get called out by the rest of the community here. (I'm guessing most people just had one name in particular pop into their head, at least if they've been reading this section of the forums for any length of time)

I think it was peterpeter that started a thread not so long ago that seemed to ask The Market forum to look at itself and wonder if we deserved the reputation as the new PWNZ. It didn't seem to take long for everyone to conclude that having someone bleet insults at people who don't like the market was a good thing and that those people have it coming. (I apologize to peterpeter if I misread the intent of his thread, but the outcome seemed to be as I described)

It would be a lot easier to accept that everyone is wrong when the stoop to insults and personal attacks, if the standard was consistent. In my experience that hasn't been the case.

Even here, we have someone calling someone else a troll, which is an absolutely clear violation of the forum rules. Yet somehow that isn't criticized, but to instead focus on one person, while continuing to ignore the behavior of others.

No one is perfect, obviously, but we can probably all do better than we have in the past.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Go into atlas now and look how many 20s 30s 40s and 50s you will find looking for team.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have. It's way, way down from where it was.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't 'do' Another Fan any more, but can't help chiming in to note that the proof of Uber's statements is in the pudding.

Market prices on recipes that were 'crashed' by runaway farming have bounced back.

Anyone can see this, it doesn't rely on anecdotal MA head counts- stuff that was selling for 10k is back up to 6 million.

Cratered supply = way less farming, period.

[/ QUOTE ]

Lol thank you for making my point.

I have to wonder though how I manage to be on both your ignore list and your obsess over list.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, considering that he seems to have an obsession with talking about his ignore list, it might be impossible to not be on both.

I was going to say though, if there is anything that might give you some pause to rethink your argument, it would be who you suddenly find yourself allied with.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
farm

–noun 1. a tract of land, usually with a house, barn, silo, etc., on which crops and often livestock are raised for livelihood.


Sorry, ranching is a subset of farming in general.

:P

[/ QUOTE ]

You bolded the wrong part. "Often" means that a farm without livestock is still a farm. Thus a farm does not require livestock.

Ranching, however, requires livestock.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but the fact remains. You can have something that is technically called a "farm" that contiains nothing but livestock. Many people might call that ranching, but it would not be wrong to call it simply farming.

Essentially there is no requirement to grow crops to have a farm, just to perform any of the the activites that fall under the rather large umbrella of things that are considered "farming".

If you are to pull up the search section of the USDA website and put in the phrase " livestock farming " you will get over 350 results.

If livestock farming is an acceptable term for the USDA, who are we to argue?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
farm

–noun 1. a tract of land, usually with a house, barn, silo, etc., on which crops and often livestock are raised for livelihood.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but are they HUGE tracts of land?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't even have to click on the link to start laughing!

But really, I'd much rather... sing... sing... sing..

farm

–noun 1. a tract of land, usually with a house, barn, silo, etc., on which crops and often livestock are raised for livelihood.


Sorry, ranching is a subset of farming in general.

:P

[ QUOTE ]
The concept of "market pvp" is a fallacy. Before WW2 and Bretton Woods, the world was fully Mercantilistic...RL market pvp if you will...and believed the market was a zero sum game, i.e. my gain was necessarily someone else's loss. We've since discovered that that's completely untrue and that's why you're seeing a proliferation of free trade agreements all over the world. I'm not gonna go into details, there are plenty of macroeconomics books that talk about this. Suffice it to say, the idea that all marketeering is "market pvp" is a fallacy.


[/ QUOTE ]

Just a small issue, you seem to recognize that not all RL economic models work in the game enviroment, then you try to use a RL model to claim that the market in our game is not a zero-sum game.

This is just not true.

The reason why RL isn't zero-sum doesn't have an equivilent in the game. Market PvP is not a fallacy, and it is a zero-sum game.

If you take two players and they only use the market, and do nothing else in the game, their only profits can come from the buying and selling of other player's drops. They can not add to the total Inf supply, they can not add to the total number of items available, they don't perform any of the functions that in RL makes trading a better than zero-sum affair.

So, I'd say on that point, it is just flat out wrong to say there is no Market PvP. I can't take the proceeds of my marketeering and open up a more efficent Enhancement factory. I just keep buying and selling the enhancments that come out of everyone else's factories (their actual playing of the game), and those factories churn out at a fixed rate (essentially).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, you're making the mistake of thinking that I (and maybe Ogon) are so foolish as to think we are good measuring sticks for the rest of the playerbase.

If I was the measuring stick on how fast people could level, we'd all have a lot more 50s next week.



[/ QUOTE ]

You show me someone who has been here more than three monts I will show you someone who has been on a farm and power leveled. They may not have cared for it may not be their thing but they know what it is and they know how to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So...

If someone has been in this game they know what powerleveling is when they see it then, eh?

And MA, where it was explicitly stated since the day it was announced was not intended to be for PL'ing and farming, you claim can't have this nebulous standard of "know it when you see it"?

Sorry, but you stumbled right into that contradiction. You can't claim that everyone knows what it is after 3 months, but that they somehow forget when they enter the MA building.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just because someone has done something it doesn't imply they know it when they see it, or that they know anything about it. Many people have ridden in automobiles but have no idea what the Otto Cycle is.

Your second mistake in that post is assuming everyone reads the boards and caught the formerly obscure post you refer to.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but you stumbled right into that contradiction. You can't claim that everyone knows what it is after 3 months, but that they somehow forget when they enter the MA building

[/ QUOTE ]

Seeing as I did not make the claim, and your two qualifiers are just wrong would you care to re-edit the post into something coherent ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wave your hands all ya want.

You said that people who have been in the game for 3 months would know what powerleveling is. (this absolutely does imply knowing it when they see it, or they wouldn't actually know what it is.)

Elsewhere you have claimed that it is completely unreasonable to expect the players to know what is "too much" when it comes to powerleveling and that the Devs need to spell it out explicitly.

If people know what powerleveling is as you say they do, then it is hard to imagine that they can't figure out when it is beyond "normal". You propose that somehow they know it, yet when they get in the MA building they could somehow accidentally do it without knowing.

The two positions are at odds with each other. Nothing needs to be edited. Thanks for the offer though.

It's up










to you to test things really good when the server comes online.


thanks.


(what? someone always does this around now....)

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No, you're making the mistake of thinking that I (and maybe Ogon) are so foolish as to think we are good measuring sticks for the rest of the playerbase.

If I was the measuring stick on how fast people could level, we'd all have a lot more 50s next week.



[/ QUOTE ]

You show me someone who has been here more than three monts I will show you someone who has been on a farm and power leveled. They may not have cared for it may not be their thing but they know what it is and they know how to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

So...

If someone has been in this game they know what powerleveling is when they see it then, eh?

And MA, where it was explicitly stated since the day it was announced was not intended to be for PL'ing and farming, you claim can't have this nebulous standard of "know it when you see it"?

Sorry, but you stumbled right into that contradiction. You can't claim that everyone knows what it is after 3 months, but that they somehow forget when they enter the MA building.

[ QUOTE ]
Im In!

Oh, Wait, this must be the COH Text Game Version, anyone know a walkthrough past the:

[ QUOTE ]
The game client was unable to connect to the login server. This may be due to a local network issue such as a firewall block, or may be because the login server is down for maintenance. Please check your network settings and try again, or check http://www.cityofheroes.com/servers/index.html for current server status.

[/ QUOTE ]

ROFL!

Tech/KK

[/ QUOTE ]


Type /go north, then /go west, then /get keys.

wait sorry... /get golden keys. otherwise you will just keep getting a "I don't see a keys here message".

GL!

[ QUOTE ]
(QR)

Bug Report: The Test Server isn't working.

I would like to be considered for the Bug Hunter badge.

Thank you for your time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, and, uh.... Patch Notes are broken.


ditto on the BH, thx.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Just have to point out.... as you noted with your 50's none of them even came close to the leveling speed you proposed in your example.

So based on your experience with the game, if you were leveling this theoretical character and you reached Level 40 in 6 hours or something, wouldn't you, looking at what the range of normal leveling speeds you have had previously think that it was odd you were able to do it at less than 1/10th of your previous fastest?

I mean, I believe that Tribal wants a challange. But his experience with game and his knowledge of its mechanics makes it hard to believe that the leveling speed of the characters is question wasn't well outside the range of his normal experience.

I just don't see how someone can level eight 50's and have the quickest one come in at 175 hours, and then would even have to wonder if leveling to 50 in 12 hours was abnormal. I could see it if you said, 50 in 100 hours, but a 50 in 12 hours would seem to fall so far outside what could be considered normal through previous experience and just plain common sense, that it is hard to believe that someone would think, "oh I guess they just decided to make leveling completely trivial in this patch."

While they have made it easier to level, the idea that the intent of MA was to make it even easier by a factor of 10 just doesn't ring true. Especially since the "we don't want people farming it" was already out there before release. Add it up and the case for "I didn't know that was too fast" seems kind of weak.

IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]


less than 20 hours to 50 is nothing spectacular or even impressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

And that is not to say that 50 levels in 20 hours is normal though. It is not. It is not intended. That some people could set themselves up to level this fast doesn't have any bearing on what the intention was with MA.

How many times did they say it wasn't a farming tool?

As has been pointed out, the problem is not that people were pushing the boundries and being really smart about designing characters. People were designing missions and critters (and also using other exploits, it wasn't all Meow farms) that people playing through didn't need to do anything special to level at a rediculous speed.

It is just hard to have sympathy for people who set up large outdoor maps consisting of only one enemy type and thought that somehow that wasn't farming. Either they had to ignore the warnings of "MA isn't for farming" or they had to somehow delude themselves into thinking that a giant outdoor map with no story and one enemy is not farming, just a poorly written story.

Either way, it doesn't add up.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying I am in favor of you getting your account banned. I'm only saying that from what I've seen you had to be going pedal to the metal to get a character deleted, so I can only infer you had to be in full-frenzy mass PL mode to get your account banned. If you weren't farming that map heavily then I'd say you have good grounds to appeal the punishment and get it overturned.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, if someone created a character and sped their way to 50 through normal content, say Task Forces, and got from 1 to 50 in say 12 hours, wouldn't that be pedal to the metal? Should those characters also get deleted?

This is the underlying problem with that rationale.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. If your SOLE metric is time... then you're simply trying to cover bad game design. You create something that specifically allows your players to do things you don't want them to, (level quicly) and instead of making changes to your product, you put some threat to those that might use your product to it's fullest and retroactively ban accounts for doing just that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sadly enough, no matter how often I try to explain this point to people, they simply assume I am a dirty exploiting PLer who did it.

Me and my whole army of 8 50s over 5 years. Where I have seen average leveling time through normal solo play on the lowest difficulty drop from 600 hours to 175.

The devs have made leveling easier and now are complaining people are doing it too fast. It boggles my mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just have to point out.... as you noted with your 50's none of them even came close to the leveling speed you proposed in your example.

So based on your experience with the game, if you were leveling this theoretical character and you reached Level 40 in 6 hours or something, wouldn't you, looking at what the range of normal leveling speeds you have had previously think that it was odd you were able to do it at less than 1/10th of your previous fastest?

I mean, I believe that Tribal wants a challange. But his experience with game and his knowledge of its mechanics makes it hard to believe that the leveling speed of the characters is question wasn't well outside the range of his normal experience.

I just don't see how someone can level eight 50's and have the quickest one come in at 175 hours, and then would even have to wonder if leveling to 50 in 12 hours was abnormal. I could see it if you said, 50 in 100 hours, but a 50 in 12 hours would seem to fall so far outside what could be considered normal through previous experience and just plain common sense, that it is hard to believe that someone would think, "oh I guess they just decided to make leveling completely trivial in this patch."

While they have made it easier to level, the idea that the intent of MA was to make it even easier by a factor of 10 just doesn't ring true. Especially since the "we don't want people farming it" was already out there before release. Add it up and the case for "I didn't know that was too fast" seems kind of weak.

IMO.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Directly:
in a direct manner

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and nowhere in there does it say you have to use the intended audience's name.

In this case NcSoft Employees was who it was directed at.

As I said so many posts ago, which you somehow tried to twist into only fitting the definition if it broke the EULA, which never had anything to do with it.

Thanks for the proof.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reading comprehension FTW ...
In the definition provided, yes it did state you had to use a name.
Directly is in a direct manner, and what was the defintion given for direct?

[ QUOTE ]

Direct:
to write (a letter) to a person b: to mark with the name and address of the intended recipient


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe you need to read the whole conversation in context.

I said that in the OP that there were comments directed at NcSoft employees.

Because there are. Three times on the first page alone there are references to "NcSoft Employees".

Now, trying to pretend that the generic "NcSoft Employee" isn't a manner of directing your communication because it isn't a proper name is pure dumbness.

That was the context. The defintion provided had nothing to do with that. Think about the defintion you quoted "to mark with the name and address..."

address?

We are talking about a forum message board here, if I say that I believe someone was directing a message at someone else (or multiple someones in the case of "NcSoft Employees") what application does the defintion given there have to do with it?

It is completely obvious that there are statements in the OP that are directed at NcSoft employees. Go read them yourself, they are the ones that start with "And if NcSoft Employees...."

The amount of stupid all over this thread is amazing though hardly surprising.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm going to make a pile of level 1s and level pact them to people. Then I'm going to take my absolutely ridiculous SS/Fire Brute and my Fire/Kin Corruptor and go into all boss maps of enemies who do pure fire damage. I think I can get my level 1s to level 50 in under 10 hours despite being level pacted to logged out toons.

I'm also sure with this approach that NCSoft employees would be willing to kindly explain to me if this behavior is "not allowed."

[/ QUOTE ]
First and foremost, if you want NCsoft answers, ask NCsoft questions, privately and directly. Asking us won't give you official answers, leaving an implied question floating on a forum for NCsoft to stumble upon and reply to at their leisure won't reliably get you an answer, and demanding an NCsoft answer in a forum question is against forum rules.


[/ QUOTE ]

Careful, you might end up on the ignore list of the rabbit fan club for pointing out the obvious.

They tend to throw dictionaries rather than read them, so only debate the point if you are prepared for some truly dumb responses.

[ QUOTE ]
Wow just wow um I gave you both definitions cause the definition of the one refers you to the other word but wow you live in your own little world. Your logic astounds me and your complete lack of common sense is just well i think i lowered my IQ just trying to comprehend it. Taking everyone's advice and placing you on ignore before i loose my sanity trying to contemplate yours. I thought it was bizarre getting pm's from people i don't know about you now i see they were wise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Confirmed: You still haven't figured out that if there are two defintinons that they are both acceptable uses, and the one that I was referring to was the second.

oy, from the looks of things, you better put me on ignore, your IQ couldn't stand to get much lower.


Edit: not to mention I wasn't the only one to correct you.


[ QUOTE ]
@Philly:

Dictionaries are great but usage and common sense prevail at times as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guess your ignore list will grow, maybe someday it can be as big as the Goat's list. Such illustrious company.

And I won't even touch the question of why people are too scared to actually speak up in the thread if they think something about me. We have a word for people like that around here, but it will just get filtered out.

[ QUOTE ]
um you seem to have missed the definition of direct lol

specifically this part: mark with the name and address of the intended recipient

perhaps you should let merriam-webster know they made a mistake

on an aside i told smurphy that if someone argued with a dictionary they would make a fool of them self ....

[/ QUOTE ]

Just an FYI....

When a dictionary has two listings for a word, you don't have to use both.

Otherwise... you might think I look foolish arguing with a dictionary, but I think it looks a might bit more foolish not knowing how to properly use one.

Have a nice day.

[ QUOTE ]
Directly:
in a direct manner

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and nowhere in there does it say you have to use the intended audience's name.

In this case NcSoft Employees was who it was directed at.

As I said so many posts ago, which you somehow tried to twist into only fitting the definition if it broke the EULA, which never had anything to do with it.

Thanks for the proof.

[ QUOTE ]
Actually yes you would have to name them which i believe is against the EULA

[/ QUOTE ]

That "Actually yes....."

Isn't actually backed up by anything. It seems like you are splitting hairs to the extreme. I don't think that breaks the EULA, while at the same time, it is obvious that it directly addresses "NCSoft Employees" which you want to claim it didn't...

Because they weren't called out by name...

Really...?

Maybe you could be the one to finally enlighten us as to what the meaning of the word "is" is.

(I mean, you did decide that to directly address someone you have to use their name with no basis, so I figure you might as well try and make up some more meanings. If you want to dissemble that much, why not just say, no one can actually be directly addressed because in your opinion it has to also take place in person, not just on a message board? Or get metaphysical, can any of us really address another "directly"? There is the lag between an event and our brains ability to process it, while at the same time none of us can truly experience what another has, therefore no direct contact can ever be made!)