Looting -- The official thread for discussing the loot system. Updated 18th March, 2013.

I gave you every oppertunity to back your point.

I asked you what fallacy, and you replied:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

"

mibuwolf wrote:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

And what is this fallacy? Logic is my specialty

Ad hominem and many many others. Source? Stuff like this:

"

I am not concerned with your mediocre feelings of butthurt as you think you deserve more loot and are unwilling to deal with it like everyone else, i am concerned with the longevity of the game and not selling out to cater to the crying masses.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

i would like to see you write explicitly to back your words. I am waiting.

Done.

Thank you for proving my point. Logical fallacy you claim, acting hard, i ask you then to be specific as we are after all in the world of logic. A fallacy is a logical mistake in reasoning, something that cannot be discussed, and it not of opinion.

You answer me: Ad hominem attacks :D

So, that i am telling you my opinion, which may be right or wrong proves exactly nothing.

You then tell me in answer that you wont reply to me ever again like... after being given the chance and FACTUALLY showing you were wrong, couldnt take it and had to ignore me.

"

I will not be replying to you any further. Good day.

You crack me up so badly.

"

wrathmar wrote:

"

viikinki wrote:

It's also somewhat sad that GGG has made no statement whatsoever on this subject (that I've noticed) for a long time.

Instead of getting caught up in this thread they are quietly working on a new system.

They are? I've seen no statement of this kind, could you please be kind and point me to the direction of findinging it?

"

Crackmonster wrote:

You then tell me in answer that you wont reply to me ever again like... after being given the chance and FACTUALLY showing you were wrong, couldnt take it and had to ignore me.

Still you think it's my fault.

You crack me up so badly.

I didn't want to reply to you because you ignore everything I say. I will not stand there and talk to a wall; same with vooodu.

You showed I was wrong? I am very confused. I answered how you made a fallacy on your part, and all I had to do was show one example. Your example I quoted was I believe a mixture of strawman and slippery slope?



Stop being a prick. I don't see the reason for this sort of behavior. That childish attitude you have is the very REASON I chose not to reply back in the first place.

If you think an ad hominem attack is a fallacy, then i have nothing more to say.

IT ends when you stop insulting me or telling me i am wrong where i am not.

Or you can just choose to roll with it the many times i tried to end this discussion already, even on points that we can agree to disagree which i only pulled out to end for your own sake.

You better heed my lead and stop discussing with me because i not not end when you keep attacking, and yes i said attack, i came into this thread defending my points and its your move to attack, mine to defend.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

If you think an ad hominem attack is a fallacy, then i have nothing more to say.

I don't think. I know. Quick google search gives me:

Source: http://books.google.com/books?id=Ikp2dGWT5O4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q=hominem&f=false

"

viikinki wrote:

"

wrathmar wrote:

"

viikinki wrote:

It's also somewhat sad that GGG has made no statement whatsoever on this subject (that I've noticed) for a long time.

Instead of getting caught up in this thread they are quietly working on a new system.

They are? I've seen no statement of this kind, could you please be kind and point me to the direction of findinging it?

They have not publically stated but I have sent PMs to multiple forums mods regarding this issue. They replied and stated that the developers are working on the issue.

The most recent was from ionface

"

ionface wrote:

Chris made that(this) thread, and I think GGG has two of their best guys fixing the issue. Even just this patch(10.2) we had some looting changes, and there will possibly be a lot more soon.

"

Crackmonster wrote:

i came into this thread defending my points and its your move to attack, mine to defend.

Huh? You didn't attack our points. You merely called us carebears and talked about how the game would be ruined.

I clearly missed your points entirely. The only valid one I saw ever mentioned was from Vooodu.

"

The argument I was referring to, is this:

"If looting options were available, then everybody will flock to the option that ISNT FFA."

However, I would counter with this:

What if we made it so that FFA had bonuses over other options provided by GGG? Vooodu mentioned this before and I think that would be an okay thing to do.

This discussion veered off track again. You guys are arguing about arguments.

"

mibuwolf wrote:

"

Crackmonster wrote:

If you think an ad hominem attack is a fallacy, then i have nothing more to say.

I don't think. I know. Quick google search gives me:

Source: http://books.google.com/books?id=Ikp2dGWT5O4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q=hominem&f=false

I must admit, the first times i have consulted the scriptures they mentioned ad hominem only as a personal attack based on opinion, and not catagorized as a fallacy. I do not believe this is known as a fallacy but rather a subfallacy, reminiscent of a fallacy but not a true one.. informal fallancy, but okay, nonetheless a fallacy it is called, i will give you that.

However, i walk the line and i can back anything i say.

The qoute you supplied me to prove it, proved nothing, for in the qoute i focused not on the person, sure, i may have given them a little touch, but the focus of my qoute was that i am not concerned with others feelings, but with the longevity. That is the focus, and not to end it with the others being bad. That disproves your example, as it is incoherent with this new qoute you have found there.

I generally never end it there you see, i may mentions others skill to support my point, but when i write i have an actual point and not just trying to diss others.

We can keep this up all day long for i did not enter any traps here.

"

mibuwolf wrote:

"

Sickness wrote:

So in the end it seems like those who are hurt by loot options are those who enjoy FFA loot but are bad at it.

That's what it seems like to me. By the way, if options were implemented, does having a quantity penalty sound fair? To provoke people that want to loot farm to instead go for FFA instead?

This has been discussed quite alot actually.
It's impossible to find it in this thread, but here is a short thread were that was the major topic:
http://www.pathofexile.com/forum/view-thread/88475

You can skip to page 4 is you are in a hurry.

tl;dr
I don't think a penalty makes much sense at all.