Gem availability sucks for self found

"

Demonoz wrote:

Works pretty well for me but im sure not everyone wants to spend the first couple hours of the start of a league rushing a Witch to A4 just to mule the gems they need either.. Especially if you are into the ladder.

Yeah, it's not the greatest. I don't exclusively play self found. The first thing I did this league was level a Marauder up to the library quest to get the duration gems and Blood Magic for my next two characters (and to sell, which made me a ton of alchs the first few days).

For anyone who doesn't know, all you need to get every gem (according to the wiki last I checked, which was right before Perandus league) is to get a Scion, Witch, and Duelist to the Library quest. I'm pretty sure A4 gems are the same for every class.

"

Jennik wrote:

"

Demonoz wrote:

Works pretty well for me but im sure not everyone wants to spend the first couple hours of the start of a league rushing a Witch to A4 just to mule the gems they need either.. Especially if you are into the ladder.

Yeah, it's not the greatest. I don't exclusively play self found. The first thing I did this league was level a Marauder up to the library quest to get the duration gems and Blood Magic for my next two characters (and to sell, which made me a ton of alchs the first few days).

For anyone who doesn't know, all you need to get every gem (according to the wiki last I checked, which was right before Perandus league) is to get a Scion, Witch, and Duelist to the Library quest. I'm pretty sure A4 gems are the same for every class.

Yeah they are Act 4 gems are all the same for everyone. For me like i said i run a Witch up to act4 then swap up i also go to act 4 because i normally always run 2 builds.. one RF and then another of whatever and sometimes that second build will end up being that witch i started anyway so thats why i go ahead and make it to the mines for the last book in case i do (Which most times i do) continue on later with her.

Running an RF build for mapping is expensive or can be so i always have another build capable of any map mods so i can save on rolling maps. This is why when this patch dropped i had a shit ton of Mara's, Witches, and Templars to test Ascendancy's but like only one of each of the other classes for testing! LOL

"

Jennik wrote:

Problem the first: you quoted me responding to one person and commented "at least don't make fun of people for being confused," which, according to this latest post, was evidently about my comments to someone else entirely. If you're looking at actions likely to cause confusion, what you've done here takes the fucking cake.

Yeah, sorry about that. I mistook which person you were talking about. The quote I reproduced was an example of you being unpleasant to A person who was confused, not THAT person. My original quote was imprecise, because I wasn't talking about you making fun of that specific person, but making fun of other people throughout the thread. You come off as seeing anyone who doesn't agree with you to be completely ridiculous, for example you derisively compared me to 9/11 truthers. Yet, while you've been wasting words on ridicule, you've also been calling for others to present arguments instead of respond to your vitriolic tone. To me that seemed, and seems, inconsistent. You're not the only person in this thread who's being inconsistent, but you're the only one who's insulted me, so you're who I'm typing at.

"

Problem the second:

So, again, I wasn't commenting on your interaction with that specific person but in general. Sorry for the confusion.

"

You are hopelessly tangled in this conversation. Your immense confusion is causing you to jumble multiple arguments together in utterly nonsensical ways. Is this in an attempt to somehow "win" this discussion? Do you somehow believe that what you're spouting isn't the most inane of gibberish? I neither know nor care. I won't bother responding to any other comments that sound like they came from a conspiracy theorist's blog, though.

I've never seen the grassy knoll, I'm confident we landed on the moon, the holocaust is legit (and major uncool), and most Australians don't have tails. I think I covered the conspiracy basics, so please, let's move on.

I don't understand what you're arguing here.

"

I am directly responding to posts from other people in those posts. Do you think it's bad for me to respond to those people?

It's not whether I think it's good or bad, but whether I think it's helpful or unhelpful. However, I'll refrain from giving you further advice about your interactions with other people, as you've made it clear you don't want to hear them.

"

What the fuck are you even talking about? I said your argument was terrible, then I gave an example demonstrating that your argument was terrible. Am I not allowed to say your argument's shit regardless of what else I say?

Please tell me you're saying something with the tiniest shred of merit soon.

I was confused by your paragraphing. I didn't know that those two paragraphs were part of the same thought. Instead, I thought one paragraph was saying that you thought I was being disingenuous, while the other was rebutting my argument.

By the way, later in that paragraph I said that I didn't disagree that better gem availability would be nice, but that I didn't think it was worth spending time to fix. I think that gem availability, if it is a problem, is a trivial problem. You didn't respond to that -- too busy telling me that my opinion is worthless -- but I am curious whether you think gem availability is more than a trivial problem? Or am I correct that fixing it would be a waste of time?

"

"

ThatsSoGoodman wrote:

To your point that my perspective is not common, I could say the same to you -- certainly plenty of people in this thread have indicated that they don't agree with you that gems are a problem.

Yes, yes. We've already established that you're rubber and I'm glue. Moving the fuck right on...

Yeah, so, some people think that trading for gems is lame, some people like it. If some people like it and some dislike it, then it may not be worth changing.

"

Your example had someone finding gems in normal difficulty. My suggestion would have him getting those gems in merciless eventually had he not found them. In a reality with better gem availability like I've suggested in this thread, he would have skipped waiting through multiple difficulties.

Right, and then it would have been less meaningful that he got those gems at all, that was my point. It was like God just dropped those gems right in his hands. As-is, movement skills remain a point of flavor between classes for SSF, which is an argument for maintaining restricted gem access. If you start as witch, you can expect to use Flame Dash unless you get lucky with drops.

"

Arguments about whether or not certain aspects of POE are mandatory are worthless copouts. Practically nothing in POE is mandatory. [...] A more worthwhile discussion is whether something is good for the game or not. I believe better gem availability is good for the game. I find no relevant drawbacks to better gem availability and many advantages, some of which I've covered in this thread.

In terms of whether increased gem availability is good for the game, in my opinion the answer is "not really, not very much". If gem availability were increased, it wouldn't make the game more enjoyable for me as someone who plays with trading enabled; for solo self-found only, I can see advantages and disadvantages to it.

"

Jennik wrote:

"

Arrowneous wrote:

 Ok,
 On

I forgot to point out that you don't need to indent your paragraphs online. You're not writing a high school essay here. You can keep doing it if it makes you happy, but keep in mind that you're going to be "that guy" who still thinks he's in Ms. Jamison's English Lit class.
l
It's like signing your posts. You can do it if you're fine looking like an utter douche, but then you're the guy who's fine looking like an utter douche. Bleh.

Hmm... I find it easier to view multiple paragraphs in a post when the first word of the paragraph is indented. I doubt most posters even know what ascii code that is used, you can't just use a space. I also never believed it was always right to follow the herd. Sometimes that could get you in a bad situation (like a herd of Lemmings running off a cliff... the ones in back are blindly following a leader to their death). Modern BBS software strips out extra spaces so I've finally (several years ago now) stopped double spacing between sentences (not needed with proportional letter spacing in all fonts).

I never have had my choice to indent (albeit only 1 space) paragraphs questioned (Why TF does he do that?, etc.). The message is always more important than the style (Hmm... that doesn't seem to be a factor for Trump voters though... oops... my bad... my thoughts leak out too much... sorry, sorry, sorry).

Edit: If an English teacher would view indenting at the start of a paragraph as correct then does't that make everyone not doing so wrong? It's too bad when the masses do something incorrectly for a long enough period of time that at some point it becomes the accepted norm and is viewed as the correct way. We have new words in the english dictionary because of this. This is just my observation, not trying to start anything.

"

Arrowneous wrote:

Edit: If an English teacher would view indenting at the start of a paragraph as correct then does't that make everyone not doing so wrong? It's too bad when the masses do something incorrectly for a long enough period of time that at some point it becomes the accepted norm and is viewed as the correct way. We have new words in the english dictionary because of this. This is just my observation, not trying to start anything.

No indentation is perfectly fine. I deal with official documents all the time, most of them use no indent, left or double justified paragraph settings. Lean and clean is never a bad choice for text formatting.

The first line indent is an inherited tradition from long handwritten documents (usually school assignments) - it makes it easier to identify separate paragraphs. This isn't a problem with digital text.

"

ThatsSoGoodman wrote:

Arguments about whether or not certain aspects of POE are mandatory are worthless copouts. Practically nothing in POE is mandatory. [...] A more worthwhile discussion is whether something is good for the game or not. I believe better gem availability is good for the game. I find no relevant drawbacks to better gem availability and many advantages, some of which I've covered in this thread. In terms of whether increased gem availability is good for the game, in my opinion the answer is "not really, not very much". If gem availability were increased, it wouldn't make the game more enjoyable for me as someone who plays with trading enabled; for solo self-found only, I can see advantages and disadvantages to it.

Well, taking that thinking to the limit means any of the multitude of topics discussed, debated, and argued here in these forums is pointless as it isn't mandatory to play PoE at all. According to a Chris comment in the State of Exile #51 podcast that appears to be what millions do. Chris stated that as a free-to-play game they get millions of looky-loos trying PoE but that about half of them drop out at the Normal Warden boss battle. He sort of just chocked it up to gamers that try out many free-to play games every week. I have no way to know if that's just the view of millions (they try many games each week for a very brief time until they find one that resonates and like to settle on playing) and is the norm in this age of many wanting instant pleasure and anything that requires a time investment is dismissed.

I've read many a post complaining about the vendors selling gems has made the gems worthless. I never viewed gems as having any value other than for the function they provide. I have (I'm sure most of us have) started a class, Scion for example, just to get the Spectral Throw skill, stash it and delete the character as we're wanting to use ST on a different class. With vendors selling gems now some of that is gone. It also makes using a specific skill and supports easier to get started with sooner. We used to have to level with whatever we found and then switch over when the primary skill gem finally dropped or we advanced a build far enough to get a specific skill as a quest reward.

Of course this is all irrelevant if you trade.

All "arguments" against this so far can be summed as as followed:
* it does not affect me, so therefore its bad
* you are greedy and lazy

Latter statement is especially hilarious considering that playing SF is ANYTHING BUT greedy and lazy.

Good job once again, community.

As a selffound player i don't see any reason to change this.

You choose selffound for the challenge and not for easy life.

Leagues are desgin around trading, in standard there is no need for a rush. Just grind or start a new character.

"

Mordad wrote:

As a selffound player i don't see any reason to change this.

You choose selffound for the challange and not for easy life.

Leagues are desgin around trading, in standard there is no need for a rush. Just grind or start a new character.

This one is a pretty good counter compared to the others, I've got to admit. But ... many, many people choose to play PoE over other ARPG's because of its sheer limitless build diversity (until reflect that is). Gems play a fundamental role in that aspect. I think the challenge in getting the "right" gear for a particular build is far more satisfying than being forced to work with what I got. The latter can be satisfied with races, imho.

"

Jennik wrote:

"Double posting" is posting the same thing twice, typically by accident. I'm expressing multiple unrelated ideas in multiple posts. I'm not sure what your issue with this is. Why do you believe this is a bad thing? It seems perfectly reasonable to me to respond to person A in one post, person B in another, and then make a general comment unrelated to those in a third.

I don't know your issue with the word "sucks," but I don't share that particular hangup with you. I'm also perfectly fine with everyone being as abrasive as they want be. The important thing is to avoid saying things that are untrue, massively stupid, or irrelevant to the topic. Most important is to practice good reading comprehension skills so that you don't keep arguing irrelevant points that have already been covered multiple times in the thread, and so that you don't start bashing a straw man.

You, for instance, are caught up on arguments related to playing self found. I've repeatedly been over why this is not an important topic to discuss, and why it's not relevant to the point of the thread, which is better gem availability. You are not arguing against better gem availability here.

Really, folks, the point of this thread is that better gem availability is a good thing and that GGG should fix the problem of poor gem availability. I mentioned SSF because it sucks particularly hard for SSF players, but I also clearly stated that it sucks for everyone. I don't care what sort of treatment you believe SSF players deserve. I don't care how you think SSF players should be forced to play the game. Your views on SSF are irrelevant.

If you have any, please provide good arguments against better gem availability. That's what this thread is missing. If you're going to defend the status quo, explain why you're defending the status quo. That would be useful to the thread.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Double%20Post

3. Which is actually enforced on various forums, to the point you'd have gotten a warning and/or forced merge for what you did in this case. Go tell Nellyfox on the ToS forums what you did wasn't double-posting - she'd likely throw a fit. Just sayin'. It's not really good form.

As far as SSF, it's kind of inseparable from effectively being the only reason for what you propose. Why should GGG bother changing gem availability as it is now when it works fine in... every case except that particular one? There is no NEED to make gems "more available." Unless you can make a credible case FOR changing it, you shouldn't expect the devs to bother - you should expect the status quo. This, alone is more than enough reason for it not to change unless you manage to make a more credible argument for why it needs to change. The game was designed around some classes having somewhat easier access to some gems. Changing it for one very arbitrary, unintended style of play isn't much different from expecting them to rebalance Ascendancies for PvP when they've already said they've pretty much discarded PvP as a thing.

And "sucks" is fairly immature. Not the most immature thing in the thread, but it really doesn't help. You've failed to maintain any real high ground against the various immature posts leveled against you, in my opinion.