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

"

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.

I am the author of this masterpiece:

WTF is this labyrinth BS???? https://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/1727950

HAHAHAHAHA

I just beat Normal lab on my character, i did it before the last boss on cruel, gonna repeat the same process for cruel lab etc.

Fucking bullshit.

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.

"

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.