User talk:Nathe/Archive
From Guild Wars Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Userpage[edit]
Instead of putting [[MainHeader]] you might consider putting {{:User:Nathe/MainHeader}} and your page should look abit better, also because MainHeader has been moved to the appropriate userspace it will be deleted soon C4K3 
Talk 16:42, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- And i can see you are creating userpages in the mainsspace, all of your personal userpages must be named User:Nathe/subpagename the pages you have created in the mainspace will be moved to the correct location and deleted, also try reading this, thx :D C4K3
Talk 16:44, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- The links on my main page are temporary until I get the tabs and outer framework set up, then I'll be moving them like you suggested. --Nathe 18:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Saaaaap[edit]
You seem to be the only other HS member besides me that has a wiki presence :P --Hawk Skeer
(Talk) 21:50, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hiya, Hawk! Good to see you! ----Nathe 16:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Moving discussion[edit]
I moved that discussion to your feedback page, to stop the bloating of Linsey's page so it could remain open. Please remove it from Linsey's page. -- Wyn 
talk 22:23, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- By moving it to your feedback page, it will A) remove the bloat from her page, and B) get her to comment on your feedback page instead. Please allow the remaining discussion to happen on your suggestion page. Thanks! -- Wyn
talk 22:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
- I understand, it just always seemed less likely that she would respond to a topic that wasn't right on her page, that's all. --Nathe 16:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I see what you did there[edit]
What has been tagged for archival WILL be archived, whether or not you feel as such. Do not remove archive tags unless you are Regina, and last I checked you aren't. — Jon 
Lupen 23:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Solo Farming and Shadow Form[edit]
- → moved from Feedback talk:Regina Buenaobra
You do realize, Regina, that if you nerf Shadow Form, half the remaining GW playerbase is likely to leave. Is that really what you want? That's not a rhetorical question, by the way, but one I'd like an answer from you for. I'd like to remind you that Linsey has specifically stated that farming is a legitimate playstyle. So why are you going against what the head of the Live Team has said? I can understand curbing speed clears (I've never actually done one myself, having only started using SF recently), but I'm sure it's possible to do that without nerfing SF and destroying the most efficient farming method in the game.
I'm sure you're aware of this, but SF is an equalizer of sorts in that it allows players other than the uppermost tier to have access to high end items. Some would prefer that only the elitist hardcore players be able to have the expensive equipment, but that only makes them as bad as people who think only the rich should have money. Not everyone has eighteen hours a day they can spend getting stuff the long way - some people actually have lives, after all. But they do still want some of the high end gear. If you're going to nerf SF, at least give those players an alternative - not game-breaking like SF, but still useable in a solo build. Thanks for your consideration and understanding. --Nathe 01:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Regina isn't personally nerfing Shadow Form. In fact, she has nothing to do with it. Linsey is, in fact, the one nerfing Shadow Form. So get your facts straight before you complain, k?
elix Omni 01:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Farming is a legitimate playstyle, permanent invincibility is not. There are other valid builds. If peeps leave because they can't cope with not being permanently invincible, then I doubt I will miss them. -- Salome
01:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- If people are going to leave because Shadow Form takes a hit then let them. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 01:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) x2Also, there are many other easy ways to solo farm. In fact, I'd say that some of those ways are just as easy, if not easier than Shadow Form. It's not a big loss if they nerf a build, because new, unforeseen builds that couldn't have worked before come hand in hand with them. ThrainFile:User Thrain Sig.pngcontribs 01:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- If people are going to leave because Shadow Form takes a hit then let them. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 01:28, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Gibberish much? ITS WAY TOO LATE to nerf SF now, for heavens sake its 5th year of Gw soon, half of the players farmed it to the limits, You will make it impossible for all the players that didnt get wealthy yet to ever obsidian armor, or any other posh equip. Id love to have proper groups farming all these places where SF is making its work but I think its greatly too late for that. Shortly : You will nerf any farm-way we design, for exapmle, if we run now obby flesh elementalist and spirit spammers to go through FoW, you will nerf it, we will make group of fast cast mesmers of all subclasses, you will nerf it also, whats the fraking point, You want to make it impossible to farm, or just everyone life miserable? Whatever --217.153.126.66 05:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Shadow Form is being address way too late... but what ya gonna do? Stop playing? You think they care people won't be able to get the pretty stuff within a few days, instead of a couple of weeks? 118.92.188.68 05:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Ow yes before SF there was nothing people could possibly do to earn money.Heck how can we live without making money on a game we stopped caring about while fapping ? Lilondra
06:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- 1. ^ 2. shut the fuck up already 3. permanent invincibility =/= farming, farming builds are useless for purposes other than farming but you can single-handedly steamroll the entire game using shadow form. edit: 4. guild wars serious business - Wuhy
13:56, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- In case some of you didn't realize Shadow form is the equivalent IDDQD godmode cheat code. It's simply cheating. Don't try to pretend its a legitimate farming way and that arenanet is "hitting on farmers again" because its not the case. The case is that for whatever unknown reason Izzy buffed Shadow Form to a level where it was the equivalent of "IDDQD for Assassins and Elementalists", and unfortunately Linsey's competence was enough only to reduce it to "IDDQD for assassins only". Now it looks like they realized that they fucked it up way back then, and they (at least pretend) are trying to reduce it's obvious overpoweredness. --Boro
14:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, being invincible is a dumb concept to begin with, but I think people should be able to be invincible on any character if they want to be. I mean, it's their right, you know? How to play the game the way they want. You know, I think that, uh, yeah, if people want to play the game on god mode, they should go ahead; that's their right. –Jette 15:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Their should be a command for them a bit like the /bonus one. I was thinking something like /fillmyxunlaiwithectos. 194.2.20.67 15:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I won't leave, actually, lately I'm playing much less, because by guild only does speed clears, since they are squeezing as much as they can before SF goes down. So, once they make the changes, I'll go back and play more often. Will we lose some players? Probably, but all that many of those that would leave do is farm and hoard stuff, which is not very different than being a bot, so it's not such a big problem. Mith
Talk 20:39, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- I know people who'll leave if Shadow Form is nerfed, I remember a friend's guild disbanding after the halloween update because they couldn't 15min HM UW, however I know more who won't, and like Mith, will play more. A lot of "You have to have this skillbar to play here" has been reinforced with Shadow Form (and what was worse Linsey comfirmed and justified this as being ok), as has always been common with elite areas, but with Shadow Form is spread from Elite Areas, to dungeons and to other areas. And it also spread to a dependence on Shadow Form, "We need Shadow Form or we'll fail" by the general community. I can't count how many times I've seen pugs for the Z-stuff to elite areas saying that.
- There is no rational line of thinking to leave Shadow Form as overpowered as it is, just like there was no rational line of thinking Arenanet can use to justify leaving it this long. It didn't take a rocket scientist to realise that in it's current form it was going to be devastating in the end. ~~000.00.00.00~~ 21:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Didn't we have this discussion about pepole leaving because they were nerfing Ursan?--Orry 01:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- I remember a lot of people that say thet they would leave ig they made a lot of things. The loot scaling, the ursan change... Once I was on alliance channel, talking about how they should change armors and weapons to have all variable properties moddable... and one or two people from another clan stated that they would leave for sure if such a change happened. They added insignia and inscriptions, and they are still today playing. I don't think having players leaving for changes that solve problems, fix bugs, improve the game or resolve issues. Since GW2 is likely to have less faults than GW1 (At least I hope they learned enough with GW1 for that to be true), then they are likely less to purchase a less broken game with less faulty mechanics to exploit. You can't sell a game without god mode to a player that only wants that. MithTalk 14:59, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- >Linsey has specifically stated farming is a legitimate playstyle
Farming is a legitimate playstyle. Godmode is not. Also: just because Linsey says something doesn't mean it's true. I think it should be obvious to everyone by this point that developers are capable of being wrong, often by extreme degrees. –Jette 23:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- >Linsey has specifically stated farming is a legitimate playstyle
- I remember a lot of people that say thet they would leave ig they made a lot of things. The loot scaling, the ursan change... Once I was on alliance channel, talking about how they should change armors and weapons to have all variable properties moddable... and one or two people from another clan stated that they would leave for sure if such a change happened. They added insignia and inscriptions, and they are still today playing. I don't think having players leaving for changes that solve problems, fix bugs, improve the game or resolve issues. Since GW2 is likely to have less faults than GW1 (At least I hope they learned enough with GW1 for that to be true), then they are likely less to purchase a less broken game with less faulty mechanics to exploit. You can't sell a game without god mode to a player that only wants that. Mith
- Didn't we have this discussion about pepole leaving because they were nerfing Ursan?--Orry 01:40, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, I won't leave, actually, lately I'm playing much less, because by guild only does speed clears, since they are squeezing as much as they can before SF goes down. So, once they make the changes, I'll go back and play more often. Will we lose some players? Probably, but all that many of those that would leave do is farm and hoard stuff, which is not very different than being a bot, so it's not such a big problem. Mith
- Their should be a command for them a bit like the /bonus one. I was thinking something like /fillmyxunlaiwithectos. 194.2.20.67 15:29, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Well, being invincible is a dumb concept to begin with, but I think people should be able to be invincible on any character if they want to be. I mean, it's their right, you know? How to play the game the way they want. You know, I think that, uh, yeah, if people want to play the game on god mode, they should go ahead; that's their right. –Jette 15:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- In case some of you didn't realize Shadow form is the equivalent IDDQD godmode cheat code. It's simply cheating. Don't try to pretend its a legitimate farming way and that arenanet is "hitting on farmers again" because its not the case. The case is that for whatever unknown reason Izzy buffed Shadow Form to a level where it was the equivalent of "IDDQD for Assassins and Elementalists", and unfortunately Linsey's competence was enough only to reduce it to "IDDQD for assassins only". Now it looks like they realized that they fucked it up way back then, and they (at least pretend) are trying to reduce it's obvious overpoweredness. --Boro
- 1. ^ 2. shut the fuck up already 3. permanent invincibility =/= farming, farming builds are useless for purposes other than farming but you can single-handedly steamroll the entire game using shadow form. edit: 4. guild wars serious business - Wuhy
- Ow yes before SF there was nothing people could possibly do to earn money.Heck how can we live without making money on a game we stopped caring about while fapping ? Lilondra
- Shadow Form is being address way too late... but what ya gonna do? Stop playing? You think they care people won't be able to get the pretty stuff within a few days, instead of a couple of weeks? 118.92.188.68 05:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
- Farming is a legitimate playstyle, permanent invincibility is not. There are other valid builds. If peeps leave because they can't cope with not being permanently invincible, then I doubt I will miss them. -- Salome
SF isn't total invincibility despite what many people say, because there are many things that can penetrate it, such as Vile Touch, and simple energy deprivation can prevent it from being reapplied, thus leading to near-instant death. And a single distraction also means death - the player needs to pay attention to make sure SF is reapplied before it runs out, and not all players use the keyboard to activate their skills so they can't just mindlessly sit there. If it were an enchantment without a set duration, such as a maintained enchantment, then you'd be justified in calling it god mode. But it's not. And so it's not, because it can be disrupted, penetrated, and shut down under the right circumstances. Even low level enemies, such as the skale in Mehtani Keys, can be lethal to an SF farmer since they can penetrate it. --Nathe 00:50, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Nathe, your argument might be valid if enemies could dynamically change their builds. But quite frankly there aren't very many skills which bypass SF, and those that do are not used by very many enemies, and if you have to change enemies just to counter one skill, that just kind of proves the skill is broken, doesn't it? --Orry 01:06, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Or you could just give enemies in the most abused areas energy drain on attack (not on hit) to make it harder to maintain SF. Linsey herself said she didn't want to touch the skill, only the areas affected by it. --Nathe 03:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- The issue of Shadow Form is not whether or not they'll nerf it. They issue is HOW they are going to nerf it. Will I able to farm Raptor Nestlings and bosses in Hard Mode but with additional limitations/slower, or will they nerf to the point of being virtually impossible to do (and may I remind you there isn't any other builds that can effectively farm bosses for elite tomes and green weapons in HM other than the 600 smite and perma SF, so nerfing perma SF and 600smite= impossible to farm green weapons from bosses in HM)? I don't want to go through the hassle of deleting my PvP Warrior and creating another one for PvE just to farm Raptors outside of Rata Sum (and even so W/N isn't that effective as perma SF anyways since it requires good amount of timing). As mentioned in the skill previews, they never specify how they plan to nerf SF (a surprise maybe). I'd recommend farming the items and green weapons you want before they nerf SF after the Wintersday redux.--Dark Paladin X 04:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- I believe what she said was "We want to actually dial back the damage penalty so that the non-perma SF users like boss killers and raptor farmers will be able to actually kill things again. We didn't say anything about making it so that you can't keep up SF permanently, nor do we have plans to do that. I prefer to address their ability to farm Chaos Plains directly rather than continue to hit the skill and hurt all the other farming builds. However, keep in mind, we don't want to completely eliminate the SF sin's ability to farm in UW. We just want to slow it down enough so that it's equal to the other farming builds/areas like the Smite fields ~ Linsey 04:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)".
- She further goes on to say "I've considered the skill to be a problem from the moment I took over Live Team. The decision to restore the ability to maintain it was made while I was still working on gw2. The first round of changes (the initial dmg reduction and the changes to chaos plains) were being made when I first moved over. From there, I have pushed us to try a few different ways to balance the skill because I still felt it was a problem. If people are still doing UWSC in 15 minutes then I think it is pretty clear that the skill is still a problem. ~ Linsey 18:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)".
- When talking about the overall balance/imbalance she said "I am more concerned about UW, FoW and DoA having issues with balance that encourage this style of play than I am concerned about Shadow Form. I would rather work on making those areas fun and bug free in ways that discourage the use of SF than work on nerfing SF into the ground. ~ Linsey 20:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)". So to say that she said I don't want to touch the skill is a bit of an overstatement of her support of Shadow Form as it stands. -- Wyn talk 04:11, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- I understand. I just meant that she didn't want to outright nerf it completely, which is true. --Nathe 18:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
- Or you could just give enemies in the most abused areas energy drain on attack (not on hit) to make it harder to maintain SF. Linsey herself said she didn't want to touch the skill, only the areas affected by it. --Nathe 03:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello![edit]
Hi there! Found your page! Let me know what you need help with and I'll be happy to assist. :) Tender Wolf 04:30, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Revert[edit]
The relationship has been confirmed, see here. --Santax (talk · contribs) 14:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, it hasn't. No one from Anet has specifically said it. It's only speculation from a non-Anet source. --Nathe 14:09, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's a Guild Wars / NCSoft press release. What more do you want? -- FreedomBound
14:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
- No, it's a summary by somebody not from Anet. Unless it's on the official GW page or said by Anet staff, it's not confirmed. --Nathe 13:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- "[This unedited press release is made available courtesy of Gamasutra and its partnership with notable game PR-related resource GamesPress.]"? -- FreedomBound 13:51, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- If you prefer a direct link: see here. -- FreedomBound 13:55, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Pertinent facts:
- It's not a rumor or speculation, it's a press release.
- It's not a summary, it's word for word.
- It's on Gamasutra, a large and reliable game developer site.
- You can easily find the press release on the NCsoft site.
- Pertinent facts:
- If you prefer a direct link: see here. -- FreedomBound
- "[This unedited press release is made available courtesy of Gamasutra and its partnership with notable game PR-related resource GamesPress.]"? -- FreedomBound
- No, it's a summary by somebody not from Anet. Unless it's on the official GW page or said by Anet staff, it's not confirmed. --Nathe 13:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's a Guild Wars / NCSoft press release. What more do you want? -- FreedomBound
- Even without the direct link to the press release on the NCsoft site that Freedom here provided, the Gamasutra link is fine for a confirmation, as it is coming directly and unaltered from the mouth of NCsoft. --Hawk Skeer
(Talk) 16:38, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- Except, Hawk, that while NCSoft does own Anet, it doesn't determine what's in the game. Anet does that. And Anet has not said anything to confirm the relationship. NCSoft does not equal Anet. Only Anet's direct word is acceptable confirmation. --Nathe 01:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Even without the direct link to the press release on the NCsoft site that Freedom here provided, the Gamasutra link is fine for a confirmation, as it is coming directly and unaltered from the mouth of NCsoft. --Hawk Skeer
(Reset indent) While I've known NCSoft to do some screwy things, I don't think any publisher would market their developers' content without their developer first telling them what said content is. --Riddle 01:59, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Anything is possible, Riddle. Until it's said by Anet itself and no one else, it's not official. Considering they originally got Gwen's profession wrong, NCSoft's credibility on the matter isn't exactly good. --Nathe 13:25, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- You have now violated GWW:1RR. Please stop. -- Wyn talk 13:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- They fixed Gwen's profession in the press release, if that makes you feel better. -- FreedomBound 13:31, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Nathe, it has been accepted by everyone else participating in the discussion to accept the NC Soft information as being official. Please do not remove the information again. If you seriously dispute it, put a dispute tag on it and continue the discussion, but your single opposition to it does not outweigh the overall consensus that has been reached. -- Wyn talk 13:33, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Nathe, it has been accepted by everyone else participating in the discussion to accept the NC Soft information as being official. Please do not remove the information again. If you seriously dispute it, put a dispute tag on it and continue the discussion, but your single opposition to it does not outweigh the overall consensus that has been reached. -- Wyn
- You have now violated GWW:1RR. Please stop. -- Wyn
Nathe, what is your problem? You are making no sense at all. You are arguing against an official press release, rejecting consensus AND breaking wiki rules. Do you have some issue with the fact that Gwen marries Kerian? --Hawk Skeer(Talk) 15:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- He's always had a problem with it, as has been evident with Feedback:User/Nathe/Leave Gwen/Thackery story as is. I guess he's just not into happy endings in his CORPGs... -- Wyn talk 16:28, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe some guys like Nathe have a crush on Gwen? Having someone like Kerian in the picture probably interferes with their virtual love fantasy. Who knows, this whole argument doesn't make any sense. --Lania Elderfire
23:12, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not so much, really, I just don't care for unnecessary assumptions being made. It's not official till Anet itself says so. NCSoft is not Anet. Which means only Anet's word is acceptable. Besides, we know that Ebonhawke wasn't founded until after the Vanguard and the Norn were driven south by Jormag and his minions about a century or so after EOTN, so she and Kieran can't have founded it. And Wyn, what I don't like is having outcomes forced on us arbitrarily. Not everything needs to be tied up and closed. Storytelling is a two-way process, not one-way. Dictation is not storytelling. The reader/player needs to be allowed to interpret/extend/whatever as he or she wishes. Not have every little detail shoved down his or her throat in such a way that no room is left for his or her own experiences and interpretations. And just because unofficial little wikimasters and members accept something as official doesn't make it so. Only Anet's word does. --Nathe 04:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, the confirmed story says otherwise. You can argue and rant against confirmed fact all you want out of some strange personal dislike of NPC romance on your talk page, but you do not break wiki policy and editor consensus in actual articles to wage your personal vendetta against the GW storyline writers. That's a good way to get blocked. --Hawk Skeer(Talk) 15:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, the confirmed story says otherwise. You can argue and rant against confirmed fact all you want out of some strange personal dislike of NPC romance on your talk page, but you do not break wiki policy and editor consensus in actual articles to wage your personal vendetta against the GW storyline writers. That's a good way to get blocked. --Hawk Skeer
- Not so much, really, I just don't care for unnecessary assumptions being made. It's not official till Anet itself says so. NCSoft is not Anet. Which means only Anet's word is acceptable. Besides, we know that Ebonhawke wasn't founded until after the Vanguard and the Norn were driven south by Jormag and his minions about a century or so after EOTN, so she and Kieran can't have founded it. And Wyn, what I don't like is having outcomes forced on us arbitrarily. Not everything needs to be tied up and closed. Storytelling is a two-way process, not one-way. Dictation is not storytelling. The reader/player needs to be allowed to interpret/extend/whatever as he or she wishes. Not have every little detail shoved down his or her throat in such a way that no room is left for his or her own experiences and interpretations. And just because unofficial little wikimasters and members accept something as official doesn't make it so. Only Anet's word does. --Nathe 04:40, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe some guys like Nathe have a crush on Gwen? Having someone like Kerian in the picture probably interferes with their virtual love fantasy. Who knows, this whole argument doesn't make any sense. --Lania Elderfire
(Reset indent) Take a few days off and think about it, next time argue for your case on the talk page and don't violate policy repeatedly. --Rainith 05:39, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- Nice try, Raineth. I'm still here. If you think a wiki ban is impregnable, I'm afraid you're a bit mistaken. --Nathe
- Rainith, note the I... If you're going to waste everyone's time circumventing a block, at least try to get it right... --Rainith 00:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Oh and Jon, if you want to play whack-a-mole with me, that's of course up to you. And incidentally, you all seem to have forgotten that Ebonhawke wasn't founded until about a century after EOTN, when the Vanguard and the Norn were forced out of the far north by Jormag's minions. So Gwen and Kieran couldn't have founded it. Which means the "press release" is wrong. --Nathe--
- Ebonhawke could have been founded by them at some point. I would like to see your "evidence" of "Ebonhawke wasn't founded until about a century after EOTN". As there was no "specific" time period of which the Norn and Vanguard left or "were forced out of the far north" by these "minions". Thanks, but your information could be flawed, unless proven. --Tesslina 20:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
- We know from MotW and the trailer that Zaitan was the first of the dragons to awaken, and that that happened about a century or so after EOTN. Jormag didn't wake till sometime after that, so his minions - creatures of ice, according to MotW - didn't force the Norn and Vanguard out until at least that point. Which means the Vanguard didn't found Ebonhawke until after that.
- Ebonhawke could have been founded by them at some point. I would like to see your "evidence" of "Ebonhawke wasn't founded until about a century after EOTN". As there was no "specific" time period of which the Norn and Vanguard left or "were forced out of the far north" by these "minions". Thanks, but your information could be flawed, unless proven. --Tesslina 20:38, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Isn't that MotW a fan made video site? Not authentic in my opinion and I'd suggest to try again. --Tesslina 17:35, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- The Movement of the World is official information that was released by Anet not long before the first trailer. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.63.112.137 (talk).
- no it isn't... it's edited by members a lot... ncsoft is the real deal... Anet only stated a bit of part of what is to be in gw2 aka beginning... not "exactly" how all of that came about... --Tesslina 20:01, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Why[edit]
are you so vehemently opposed to this Thackeray/Gwen thing? I can understand wanting to leave the storyline more open to interpretation, but the extent you're taking it to borders denial that your girlfriend just dumped you for the guy with the longbow and Ebon Vanguard armor. Especially because you've done no such thing with press releases from other sites on other topics (even though, as you put it, "[n]o one from Anet has specifically said it"), yet this round you're going so far as 1RR-ing and block-circumventing.
Cool it. You're not accomplishing anything useful. --Kyoshi (Talk) 
03:31, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- I bet he will still be denying it even after they have a wedding in game through some cheezy quest ^^. --Lania Elderfire 15:17, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Not really. I've gotten Kieran all the stuff he needs for the picnic, which I wouldn't have done had I been as opposed as you say. It's just that Linsey specifically told me on her wiki page last year that when they were making EOTN, they were trying to consider those who didn't like Gwen or know as much about her, which is why her introduction wasn't as involved as it actually might have been - there had actually been a bit of a debate amongst the devs about it while EOTN was being made. Yet with this new content, she's not showing the same consideration for those who might not like it or the idea of it. She's being a hypocrite. The devs' job is to create content that appeals to as broad a spectrum of the userbase as possible, not outright ignore parts of it just because she doesn't think she needs to be consistent in her behavior or aware of other points of view.
- And as for the block, I was just doing this to show that it doesn't mean anything because it can so easily be gotten through. So there's no point in keeping it up.
She's not being a hypocrite; Aren't you for not allowing the devs to do the game the way they feel that it should be done? I think you're being blind and selfish. I hope with your time off, you'd grow up. --Tesslina 17:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
- Considering those who might oppose =/= adhering to the ideas of those who might oppose. "Considering" is not a promise. Ever. Whether it's consistent with her behavior can be debated, and since people change over time (no matter how much they, or others, might deny it) the fact that Gwen might start to like Thackeray back does not seem out of the question. And just because the playerbase (actually, from what I've seen, just you) wants it to be some way, it doesn't mean that ANet will cater to them (you).
- Regardless of your reason, a press release has shown up, from a reliable source, and you are denying that it has any truth to it whatsoever. It's denial in some sense, regardless of what you may think of the pairing, and it's almost as ridiculous as an NPC crush when your pseudo-vendetta against ANet is applied as the reasoning for your denial.
- I point you above to what Wyn said about your block, and quote myself again: "Cool it. You're not accomplishing anything useful." --Kyoshi (Talk)
18:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Clarification[edit]
I don't believe that you understand that when a user is banned from editing here, he's banned. No comments, whether or not he proxies, no changes to any page (even his own userpage), no editing at all is allowed. Just because a person can find an IP address to edit from, doesn't mean they should. Thus, any comments that are made by a banned user can be, and in this case, (see Guild_Wars_Wiki_talk:Admin_noticeboard#User:Nathe) will be, removed. This is what I meant when I said your voice could be silenced.
Please just sit out your ban, and come back with a fresh attitude. -- Wyn talk 07:10, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- To add to that, I decided to overlook the fact that you circumvented your block again this time, but I will lengthen your block next time you try to edit from a proxy while still blocked. Take it like a man, wait out your block and we'll welcome you back with open arms. Or if you really think your block was unfair you can appeal your block but given that you've broken policy and circumvented your original block repeatedly I wouldn't expect much result if you choose to do that. — Why
08:16, 27 April 2010 (UTC) - "you will be brought before arb com, and your voice will be silenced permanently here." Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ аІiсә
ѕνәи Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ 01:19, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- What was that for, Alice? This is an old topic... --Nathe 13:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Copyright[edit]
Responding to "what evidence is there that any actual harm has been done here?". The creators of those images were not reimbursed for their work. G R E E N E R 18:32, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- And what makes you think every use must be monetized? How do you track that? How do you prove a negative? Again, what is the evidence? What specific harm has the lack of "reimbursement" done to Anet? --Nathe 18:46, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
About the new derv[edit]
- → moved from Feedback_talk:John_Stumme#About the new derv
- You really only need to strip an ench for DW. Dervs can do everything else (meaning damage) just fine. — Raine Valen
22:12, 18 Feb 2011 (UTC)
- In my opinion the only skill that realy got nerfed is Aura of Holy Might. I mean the older version was too good so other classes abused it however couldnt it be just linked in some way to Mysticism so other classes wont abuse it? I mean you could probably do something similar to Elemental Lord skill which had an Energy Storage linked bonus like doing it 12% of the dmg bonus will be linked to the kurz/lux title and the rest 20% will be linked to mysticism? That way other classes will be able to benefit from it but not as good as derv. However i don't think the new Aura of Holy Might is bad, only compared to the older version the dmg is almost less then half so either change it back to its older version with some of the dmg bonus linked to mysticism or just up the dmg of the newly current version(so it wont be bad compared to old version).Although i understand what u did with it (while looking at Asuran Scan) i understand that it indeed was overpowered, so i think that if you will change it to its older version you should just reduce the dmg bonus(i.e. instead of 32% when maxed title just 20% or even 15% will do just fine). Please consider what i said and write here your thoughts about it^^(other then that this update kicks ass =P)Kingmor 22:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you're going to directly request user input on your ideas, you should create your own user feedback page instead of hijacking a section of a staff member's page. --ஸ Kyoshi
22:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- About that i realy don't know how to start one :\. Is there any guide in wiki that helps you start one?, if yes i will gladly put this on my user feedback page. Kingmor 22:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Feedback:Getting started --ஸ Kyoshi 22:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks it realy helped =), i edited my feedback page with a bit mroe explained version of what i wrote here so plz check it out and give your opinion about it^^. Feedback talk:User/Kingmor Kingmor 22:52, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Feedback:Getting started --ஸ Kyoshi
- About that i realy don't know how to start one :\. Is there any guide in wiki that helps you start one?, if yes i will gladly put this on my user feedback page. Kingmor 22:35, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you're going to directly request user input on your ideas, you should create your own user feedback page instead of hijacking a section of a staff member's page. --ஸ Kyoshi
- In my opinion the only skill that realy got nerfed is Aura of Holy Might. I mean the older version was too good so other classes abused it however couldnt it be just linked in some way to Mysticism so other classes wont abuse it? I mean you could probably do something similar to Elemental Lord skill which had an Energy Storage linked bonus like doing it 12% of the dmg bonus will be linked to the kurz/lux title and the rest 20% will be linked to mysticism? That way other classes will be able to benefit from it but not as good as derv. However i don't think the new Aura of Holy Might is bad, only compared to the older version the dmg is almost less then half so either change it back to its older version with some of the dmg bonus linked to mysticism or just up the dmg of the newly current version(so it wont be bad compared to old version).Although i understand what u did with it (while looking at Asuran Scan) i understand that it indeed was overpowered, so i think that if you will change it to its older version you should just reduce the dmg bonus(i.e. instead of 32% when maxed title just 20% or even 15% will do just fine). Please consider what i said and write here your thoughts about it^^(other then that this update kicks ass =P)Kingmor 22:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
(Reset indent) @Nathe: There are skills which don't require you to strip enchantments to be at its greatest effect, and there are enchantments (flash and otherwise) which act in the same manner as originally (having a duration effect, maybe an initial and end as well). Your choices are more limited, but it's not necessary. -- Konig/talk 22:42, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- Honestly, I thought the enchant removal would be :\. But it's really more like :D. — Raine Valen 22:56, 18 Feb 2011 (UTC)
- The very act of making those choices more limited is itself confining, Konig. The choices should be equal, not tilted in either direction. Most of the new skills require either stripping an enchant or losing one to get the better effects. None reward you for keeping the enchantment up. How are you supposed to benefit from the effects of your enchantments when they're constantly being removed one way or the other? And I'm surprised no one's mentioned how Avatar of Melandru is now not nearly as useful now that its immunity to conditions is gone. They could have kept that but made it conditional somehow and it still would have been a good skill. Having now read through the list of changes, I find the update to be something of a mixed bag, and I feel like Anet is trying to force us to play our dervs in a certain way and not allow us to decide for ourselves how we want to do it. --Nathe 22:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- That's because they rather are trying to make you play dervishes in a certain way. Every profession is like that. Dervishes is like a melee ritualist with enchantments rather than spirits, or like a paragon with shouts, or a mesmer/necro with hexes, or gw2's ranger with pets. You don't have to play with spirits, shouts, hexes, or pets (respectively), but if you don't you're severely limiting yourself. -- Konig/talk 23:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- uhh, I don't think it's wise to bring Rits into a discussion about well balanced playstyles.... --ilr
23:25, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- I know they're trying to pigeonhole the classes, Konig, but what that does is limit our creativity and freedom to play the class as we choose. I don't like being told that I have to play a class a certain way and one way only. Variety and flexibility are much more fun. Choice is more fun. Forcing certain roles through skill nerfs and punishing others is not fun. The way the dervish is now, there are no skills aside from Mystic Regeneration that reward a player for having multiple enchants in place, though before the update there used to be more of them. And the devs don't seem to understand that physical combat is fast, and physical attack skills need to reflect that in their activation and recharge times - they should have been made shorter, if anything, not longer. Faster skills are easier to use in the middle of a fight and easier to keep track of. The speed of Eremite's and Mystic Sweep, for example, was fine as it was before the update, and you never had to rely on autoattacks to kill things with your weapon, at least not for very long. Now, though, the derv has very few scythe attack skills with recharges of 4 seconds or less, and none with the fractional activation times that Eremite's and MS once had. Any activation time longer than that, even just 1 second, tends to feel sluggish when you're using it. It's hard to keep pressure on when you have to wait for skills to recharge and your swings feel leaden. --Nathe 20:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- The
speed is an easy fix, just bring a hero /w high Wilderness and 
since energy is really not an issue anymore. Or do it yourself and run 
on top. The other issue of Teardown, I agree is more prickly... We've still got a couple good "Utility" teardown skills like 
-- but sadly, our old 33% IAS skills are now only 25% and there's still some debate (and revert warring) on what the scythe attack interval is now possibly due to there being an unintended hesitation period right between each animation (I've seen it happen before...) ...which does muddy the water (perceptually) for the actual Attack skills that use teardown and don't provide the same level of utility in PvE either directly, based on attack interval, or b/c they also require 
, EG: 
...about the only two that actually gained Utility (with real cross-profession potential) were 
and 
. ...So I think you're wrong on a Philosophical level about teardown being something that restricts our options... it can actually expand our roles when executed with that purpose. The way it was execute here, just happened to limit our role to a Warrior copycat instead. :( ...fun for PvP maybe, but not so fun for PvE. --ilr 21:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Except that ranger spirits are useless because they take so incredibly long to cast. Which is something that is long overdue for a fix (please take a look at this, John, it's badly needed). 2 seconds at most, which would still allow a window for interruption but also allow them to be used more easily since as it is now, by the time the spirit is set down, the fight is already half over if your party is any good. Which practically negates the whole reason for bringing the spirit in the first place. And dervish melee damage is lower now than it was before since almost all the common damage boosters have been nerfed (what possessed you to do that, John? I'd really like to know), so my choice of secondary is defined by making up for that mistake on the dev's part. Used to be, it wasn't so hard to hit more often than not for over 100 at a time, now it's a struggle to even get close to that. SQ is out because ranger 2nds aren't all that good for adding extra damage to melee, plus it requires considerable investment in Wilderness Survival to be any good - and dervs are already spread thin between Mysticism, Scythe Mastery, and either Earth or Wind Prayers (whichever's your preference). Teardown does restrict our options because very few derv attack skills now have good benefits or good speed without forcing you to lose an enchantment or three. Battles are too fast for micromanaging your skills, and doing so takes the fun out of the fight anyway cause you're concentrating on the bar and the indicators and not on the fight itself. --Nathe 22:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with everything you said, but some of it makes me wonder if you've played anything but a dervish. -- Armond
{{Bacon}} 14:59, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, Armond, I have characters of every profession except paragon (ran out of character slots), and my main is a ranger (who just hit his 2nd year birthday this month, by the way). Had to adjust his bar too since Asuran Scan is dead now. Anet seems to really have it out for making the physical classes practically toothless. --Nathe 17:59, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
- You know, a lot of Teardown skills can be combined with flash enchantments to make a quick, hard-striking beneficial attack combo that's incredibly quick. For instance, on my Derv, despite the Elite that I may use, I'll always be seen with Zealous Renewal (or Balthazar's Rage) and Twin Moon Sweep. Now, those are two out of 8 skills on my bar. I've got room to fit in whatever else I want, anything from Ebon Dust Aura to Avatar of Grenth. The Teardown-Flash Enchantment combination actually allows for a great deal of flexibility in active skill combos. even more than other professions, since stripping the enchantments usually has a beneficial effect. How you combine, and by extension, use the Teardown-Flash Enchantment combo is really up to how creative you are. Plus, when you think about it, you're not really micromanaging anything. In my humble opinion, I think that the introduction of Flash Enchantments turns the Dervish into more of a faceroll class, although not to the extent of the Assassin. Using your skills properly and not messing your combo up (for example, accidentally stripping Grenth's Aura) is just a display of basic observational skills, and seeing how many blue boxes you have left and whether that funny gray skill is going to make one of those blue boxes die, or putting the blue boxes in the right order. A pretty simple system, when you think about it. At least, that's what I think.Zetta 03:08, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Except that you can no longer gain similar effects without losing your enchantments and thus, the benefits they provide. What's the point of having them if you're not going to use them? And you still can't manually choose which enchant to lose, it's still random, just a random derv enchant. But I want my enchants on me so I can benefit from what they do, it's the whole reason I cast them. For teardown, it doesn't really matter what enchants you bring, they could be totally random because you're not actually going to be using them for their effects. What I'm saying is, I don't like being all but forced to use a particular mechanic. I prefer to have the choice, an equal choice and not one heavily tilted away from my preference. Remove the enchant-losing requirement from a lot of the derv skills, John, and don't push that on us so much. Let us decide whether we want to use that mechanic or not. We're the players here, the ones who run these skills more often than any of you. And your reference to PvX of actually being good bothers me, because any player worth their salt knows it's just a source for unskilled players to copy/paste builds without really understanding how they work. I've never used it nor do I intend to. And your skill adjustments shouldn't cater to the crowd that does. --Nathe 17:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If an enchantment has an end effect (Heart of Holy Flame sets on fire) then you are, in fact, using them for their effect. There are still enchantments with passive benefits, and you can still use them for those effects (HoHF still lasts 30 seconds and recharges in 10) while also using them for their end effects (strip it, reapply it instantly, done). You don't even have to have a strict combo to follow to be useful. You just have to pay attention to your effects bar and your skillbar instead of loading up and charging in. It allows you to be more active. --ஸ Kyoshi 17:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- If an enchantment has an end effect (Heart of Holy Flame sets on fire) then you are, in fact, using them for their effect. There are still enchantments with passive benefits, and you can still use them for those effects (HoHF still lasts 30 seconds and recharges in 10) while also using them for their end effects (strip it, reapply it instantly, done). You don't even have to have a strict combo to follow to be useful. You just have to pay attention to your effects bar and your skillbar instead of loading up and charging in. It allows you to be more active. --ஸ Kyoshi
- Except that you can no longer gain similar effects without losing your enchantments and thus, the benefits they provide. What's the point of having them if you're not going to use them? And you still can't manually choose which enchant to lose, it's still random, just a random derv enchant. But I want my enchants on me so I can benefit from what they do, it's the whole reason I cast them. For teardown, it doesn't really matter what enchants you bring, they could be totally random because you're not actually going to be using them for their effects. What I'm saying is, I don't like being all but forced to use a particular mechanic. I prefer to have the choice, an equal choice and not one heavily tilted away from my preference. Remove the enchant-losing requirement from a lot of the derv skills, John, and don't push that on us so much. Let us decide whether we want to use that mechanic or not. We're the players here, the ones who run these skills more often than any of you. And your reference to PvX of actually being good bothers me, because any player worth their salt knows it's just a source for unskilled players to copy/paste builds without really understanding how they work. I've never used it nor do I intend to. And your skill adjustments shouldn't cater to the crowd that does. --Nathe 17:32, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with everything you said, but some of it makes me wonder if you've played anything but a dervish. -- Armond
- Except that ranger spirits are useless because they take so incredibly long to cast. Which is something that is long overdue for a fix (please take a look at this, John, it's badly needed). 2 seconds at most, which would still allow a window for interruption but also allow them to be used more easily since as it is now, by the time the spirit is set down, the fight is already half over if your party is any good. Which practically negates the whole reason for bringing the spirit in the first place. And dervish melee damage is lower now than it was before since almost all the common damage boosters have been nerfed (what possessed you to do that, John? I'd really like to know), so my choice of secondary is defined by making up for that mistake on the dev's part. Used to be, it wasn't so hard to hit more often than not for over 100 at a time, now it's a struggle to even get close to that. SQ is out because ranger 2nds aren't all that good for adding extra damage to melee, plus it requires considerable investment in Wilderness Survival to be any good - and dervs are already spread thin between Mysticism, Scythe Mastery, and either Earth or Wind Prayers (whichever's your preference). Teardown does restrict our options because very few derv attack skills now have good benefits or good speed without forcing you to lose an enchantment or three. Battles are too fast for micromanaging your skills, and doing so takes the fun out of the fight anyway cause you're concentrating on the bar and the indicators and not on the fight itself. --Nathe 22:59, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- The
- I know they're trying to pigeonhole the classes, Konig, but what that does is limit our creativity and freedom to play the class as we choose. I don't like being told that I have to play a class a certain way and one way only. Variety and flexibility are much more fun. Choice is more fun. Forcing certain roles through skill nerfs and punishing others is not fun. The way the dervish is now, there are no skills aside from Mystic Regeneration that reward a player for having multiple enchants in place, though before the update there used to be more of them. And the devs don't seem to understand that physical combat is fast, and physical attack skills need to reflect that in their activation and recharge times - they should have been made shorter, if anything, not longer. Faster skills are easier to use in the middle of a fight and easier to keep track of. The speed of Eremite's and Mystic Sweep, for example, was fine as it was before the update, and you never had to rely on autoattacks to kill things with your weapon, at least not for very long. Now, though, the derv has very few scythe attack skills with recharges of 4 seconds or less, and none with the fractional activation times that Eremite's and MS once had. Any activation time longer than that, even just 1 second, tends to feel sluggish when you're using it. It's hard to keep pressure on when you have to wait for skills to recharge and your swings feel leaden. --Nathe 20:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- uhh, I don't think it's wise to bring Rits into a discussion about well balanced playstyles.... --ilr
- That's because they rather are trying to make you play dervishes in a certain way. Every profession is like that. Dervishes is like a melee ritualist with enchantments rather than spirits, or like a paragon with shouts, or a mesmer/necro with hexes, or gw2's ranger with pets. You don't have to play with spirits, shouts, hexes, or pets (respectively), but if you don't you're severely limiting yourself. -- Konig/talk 23:10, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- The very act of making those choices more limited is itself confining, Konig. The choices should be equal, not tilted in either direction. Most of the new skills require either stripping an enchant or losing one to get the better effects. None reward you for keeping the enchantment up. How are you supposed to benefit from the effects of your enchantments when they're constantly being removed one way or the other? And I'm surprised no one's mentioned how Avatar of Melandru is now not nearly as useful now that its immunity to conditions is gone. They could have kept that but made it conditional somehow and it still would have been a good skill. Having now read through the list of changes, I find the update to be something of a mixed bag, and I feel like Anet is trying to force us to play our dervs in a certain way and not allow us to decide for ourselves how we want to do it. --Nathe 22:56, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
- The problem with your whole argument, Nathe, is that you don't know what you're talking about. Your number one biggest assumption in this section has been when you said "Let us decide whether we want to use that mechanic or not. We're the players here, the ones who run these skills more often than any of you" - and that's also been your number one logical fallacy. Your opinion as a player doesn't actually mean much; if you want something changed, feel free to edit the source code, release a new update, kick everyone out of their PvP streaks, and listen to everyone whine on your talk page about how you done got it wrong, son. A developer is not obliged to change anything in his game just because the players are disgruntled (and you certainly seem disgruntled to me); he changes things for the good of the game. You have no right whatsoever to say "Remove the enchant-losing requirement from a lot of the derv skills, John, and don't push that on us so much", and likewise, John's job is to gather feedback and discuss changes, not to do what you say.
- You said that "I feel like Anet is trying to force us to play our dervs in a certain way and not allow us to decide for ourselves how we want to do it", and you were spot on. That's what every company ever has done with every class ever and every game ever. Guild Wars has a lot of flexibility in allowing you to be bad; if you want to play a necromancer with a hammer that sticks to the frontline using Enfeeble to combo for KDs, no one will stop you, but neither will they group with you. If you want to play a dervish, you've got approximately one and a half metric fucktons of flexibility with regards to skill choice, attributes, and armor (and that's just as a primary dervish). However, ANet has a model for their dervish, and if you want to play it effectively, you have to follow that model, just like you have to follow the model for every other class in every other game. You say that "...what that does is limit our creativity and freedom to play the class as we choose", and yeah, you're right - but that was exactly true before the update as well. If you "don't like being told that I have to play a class a certain way and one way only" (even though that's not the case at all), tough!
- Blizzard explained this phenomenon best a few months ago. They made a major overhaul to healing, health pools, and a number of class mechanics with their new expansion, and of course their forums were full of complaints. One employee posted something along the lines of "We took feedback, we listened to what was wrong in the last expansion, and we made a decision as to what to change. A number of you are saying that none of the players were looking for this, and that's not true; but even if it were, in the end this is a decision that Blizzard, not the playerbase, made, because we feel that this is what is best for the game." It's important to note that in both the cases of the Cataclysm expansion and the recent dervish update, there were still many viable ways to play the game after the update; things had changed, but not to the point where the game was unplayable. A number of problems with the games were identified and changed (skills that reward stacking dervish enchantments, spammability of attack skills, every scythe hit being too large, fast pace of play, etc), and the few people who had settled into their rut of playing things wrong need to wake up and smell the coffee.
- Completely besides your lack of right to determine what direction the game moves in, a number of your arguments have been flat wrong here. You talk about it being hard to pressure now because everything is too slow paced, but you also say that watching your effects monitor gives you no time to pay attention to the field - guess what, pick one. As a good player you don't spend all your time staring at your effects monitor or all your time watching the field. The slower pace due to slower recharging skills gives you more time to watch what's going on, and in fact since teardown is so important now you really shouldn't have to watch your effects monitor to know what your dervish enchantments are anyway. Know what you have on you by knowing what keys are bound to what, and don't overlap your enchantments too much since with the random removal that's a bad idea anyway. You also claim that "For teardown, it doesn't really matter what enchants you bring, they could be totally random because you're not actually going to be using them for their effects" - this is flat wrong. A number of the enchantments have powerful ending effects - just skimming through the update notes, I'm seeing EDA, Dust Cloak, Balth's Rage, Mystic Corruption, and Heart of Holy Flame. Maximizing the initial and ending effects of these spells is crucial to playing good derv. All of these skills except EDA give you little incentive to maintain the enchantment's effect in the first place; you can just use, for example, Dust Cloak immediately followed by, I don't know, Wearying Strike, and this is just as effective as maintaining the enchantment for a bit (actually more so, since there's much less risk of being stripped).
- There are still builds possible that maintain enchantment effects. If you want to take Grenth's Aura, Grenth's Grasp, Rending Aura, or Sand Shards, you can still do that effectively. Chilling Victory doesn't hit things for half their health bars anymore, but it's still pretty powerful, and so are Crippling Victory, Radiant Scythe, Reap Impurities, Farmer's Scythe, and Zealous Sweep.
- I'd also like to point out the irony of starting a gigantic section to pass on a message that was hidden under a wall of text.
- tl;dr adapt or die, read the whole thing.
- -- Armond{{Bacon}} 18:50, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- As far as builds that are truly effective for PvE is concerned, there is only a handful of skill combos that provide the most effectiveness IMO. The main problem with derv damage is that the armor ignoring bonus damage is small compared to warror or sin attack skills even with the teardowns so "damage" isn't going to be the primary focus IMO even though the damage is respectable. Applying spammable AoE DW, cracked armor, and cripple so that the rest of the party can beat the snot out of everything is gonna be the main focus IMO... and guess what? cripple is kinda useful in hardmode when there are many AI enemies that kite all over the place. But even with that... for PvE, the dervishes are a bit on the underpowered side but at least this time they have a respectable niche... PvP on the other hand... wow... just wow... can we say dervs are back with a vengeance? --Lania 20:24, 22 February 2011 (UTC) 20:24, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
- Armond, by flexibility I mean the option to choose not to use the teardown mechanic at all. Now it's much harder to do because far fewer skills than before allow you to do so. And show me how a derv is supposed to do respectable per-target damage in HM when enemies have much higher armor. Problem with those skills you mentioned is, they don't let you hit for over 100 per target. You know how much health enemies in HM have, and 50 damage per target will not cut it in there. Any physical class needs to be able to do high per-target damage because it is not armor-ignoring and will be reduced, unlike most casters who have many armor-ignoring options. And you're wrong about not having the right to have a say in how the game is played. We paid for this game, this continually changing experience, and thus we should have the freedom to choose any path within a prof with equal effectiveness. What I mean is, that a teardown derv will not be more powerful than a non-teardown derv, and vice versa. A prof should still be the best at what it does compared to other profs, but within the profs, there should be allowed to be many equal ways of playing that are not stronger than the other. It's called balance. --Nathe 18:10, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
- As far as builds that are truly effective for PvE is concerned, there is only a handful of skill combos that provide the most effectiveness IMO. The main problem with derv damage is that the armor ignoring bonus damage is small compared to warror or sin attack skills even with the teardowns so "damage" isn't going to be the primary focus IMO even though the damage is respectable. Applying spammable AoE DW, cracked armor, and cripple so that the rest of the party can beat the snot out of everything is gonna be the main focus IMO... and guess what? cripple is kinda useful in hardmode when there are many AI enemies that kite all over the place. But even with that... for PvE, the dervishes are a bit on the underpowered side but at least this time they have a respectable niche... PvP on the other hand... wow... just wow... can we say dervs are back with a vengeance? --Lania
(Reset indent) I'm not ignoring this, despite the delayed response; I just got super depressed when I went to write a complete reply. -- Armond
{{Bacon}} 04:54, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
Feedback[edit]
Feedback and suggestions regarding game updates and specific Guild Wars changes belong here, in your feedback space; not directly on ANet staff talk pages. Refrain from pestering devs with suggestion topics that don't belong on their pages. Thanks! -Auron 08:09, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- I would if I had any guarantee that I'd get an official response, yea or nay. That's why a lot of people post their ideas. They want an official reponse. And the feedback space is not serving that need. Until it does, people will continue to post their ideas on dev talk pages. --Nathe 18:36, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- And once again, you get it ALL wrong. A) I am NOT a sysop, I couldn't cope with whiners anymore. B) You are not entitled to an Official Response, and were never promised one. C) Sysops have the right to use their discretion to ban you for continually harassing the devs with your "issues". Why don't you become a contributing member of this community. Your contribution history is nothing but bitching on talk pages, and harassing ArenaNet staff. -- Wyn talk 19:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- Nathe; currently, policies exist regarding game suggestions. They belong in the feedback space of the user that suggests them. That is where they will go. Future suggestions on dev talk pages will be removed entirely, not simply moved after the discussion has become bloated, and if you persist in violating the rules of the feedback namespace you will be blocked. Any questions? -Auron 07:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- *yawn* What makes you so special that you should get an official response? Also, remember that this is a wiki, not a forum. --JonTheMon 13:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- I am not talking about me, I am talking about everyone that posts a suggestion. Everyone. Simply treating people's ideas as if they don't exist isn't a good way to get people to think well of this place or of Anet. Make them feel valued and wanted. --Nathe 17:06, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- The live team has, what, four people? Responding to every piece of feedback is impossible. Responding to enough feedback to calm people like you down would delay updates even further. Even Blizzard, who has people specially trained and employed to read and respond to forums and feedback, responds essentially at random. -- Armond{{Bacon}} 19:24, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- I never said it had to be much of a response. Just something other than silence. --Nathe 20:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Silence is the only thing they have time for. elix Omni 21:48, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- If that... doubt they'll even read it tbh. --Lania 23:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- And that is the entire problem. That is what needs to be solved. --Nathe 04:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- So... you want them to magically have more time and energy to read all the suggestions? --JonTheMon 05:21, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Seriously... there is really only so much a human can do in a 40hr work week.. which I am sure they are working much longer than 40hrs a week, and even with that, they still don't have time. What you ask for is the impossible..... --Lania 06:49, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- And that is the entire problem. That is what needs to be solved. --Nathe 04:20, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- If that... doubt they'll even read it tbh. --Lania
- Silence is the only thing they have time for.
- I never said it had to be much of a response. Just something other than silence. --Nathe 20:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- I'm saying there's got to be a middle ground somewhere. The fact you won't even consider the possibility only shows your unwillingness to look into different possibilities. But there are always possibilities, if you're open to looking for them. --Nathe 18:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah it's possible... If Anet hires a team of Wiki-liaisons that just handles feedback communication between the wiki and the Anet Devs then that could work. The probability that they will do something like that for GW1? Near zero. It's true that there are always possibilities as you say, but your possibilities also have to be realistic and probable if you are going to pursue them. --Lania 18:29, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- Who said a team was needed? One person alone could do it. Please try not to have such narrow vision. Simply putting a "yes," "no," or "maybe" on each suggestion doesn't take much more than a single person's effort, assuming they are first trained on what is and isn't doable by the Live Team in a reasonable amount of time and priority. --Nathe 19:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Even one extra person is too much of a request for the live team. If you pay attention to the finances of NCsoft the past couple of years, Anet has not been contributing anything substantive to the overall coffers of cash, which means hiring another person for a dying game is a tough sell for management. Plus I think one person can't do that enormous job. We already have community managers that relay info from wiki and guru back to the devs. They just don't comment and reply to everything because that takes up an insane amount of time. And they already have like what? 4 people? That is a "team" of people and yet they still don't have enough time/energy to reply to everything/anything here. Reply in Guru is about as much as they can offer for the most part. --Lania 20:05, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- As I said below, at the rate of 1 suggestion per minute and 200 per day, all the suggestions in the space could be addressed in under two weeks, max. Then the rate of answering could be slowed down since it would only need to be done as new suggestions come in. 200 suggestions a day is a little over 3 hours of work at most and doesn't have to be done all in one go, either. It could be easily broken up amongst other work, possibly even without hiring anyone else. --Nathe 21:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Even one extra person is too much of a request for the live team. If you pay attention to the finances of NCsoft the past couple of years, Anet has not been contributing anything substantive to the overall coffers of cash, which means hiring another person for a dying game is a tough sell for management. Plus I think one person can't do that enormous job. We already have community managers that relay info from wiki and guru back to the devs. They just don't comment and reply to everything because that takes up an insane amount of time. And they already have like what? 4 people? That is a "team" of people and yet they still don't have enough time/energy to reply to everything/anything here. Reply in Guru is about as much as they can offer for the most part. --Lania
- Who said a team was needed? One person alone could do it. Please try not to have such narrow vision. Simply putting a "yes," "no," or "maybe" on each suggestion doesn't take much more than a single person's effort, assuming they are first trained on what is and isn't doable by the Live Team in a reasonable amount of time and priority. --Nathe 19:43, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah it's possible... If Anet hires a team of Wiki-liaisons that just handles feedback communication between the wiki and the Anet Devs then that could work. The probability that they will do something like that for GW1? Near zero. It's true that there are always possibilities as you say, but your possibilities also have to be realistic and probable if you are going to pursue them. --Lania
- The live team has, what, four people? Responding to every piece of feedback is impossible. Responding to enough feedback to calm people like you down would delay updates even further. Even Blizzard, who has people specially trained and employed to read and respond to forums and feedback, responds essentially at random. -- Armond
- I am not talking about me, I am talking about everyone that posts a suggestion. Everyone. Simply treating people's ideas as if they don't exist isn't a good way to get people to think well of this place or of Anet. Make them feel valued and wanted. --Nathe 17:06, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- And once again, you get it ALL wrong. A) I am NOT a sysop, I couldn't cope with whiners anymore. B) You are not entitled to an Official Response, and were never promised one. C) Sysops have the right to use their discretion to ban you for continually harassing the devs with your "issues". Why don't you become a contributing member of this community. Your contribution history is nothing but bitching on talk pages, and harassing ArenaNet staff. -- Wyn
Quick tip[edit]
Please read people's comments before commenting on them. Everyone in that section, inclusive of you and Wyn, is looking for a suitable middle ground. Starting a post with off-topic, inaccurate characterizations of someone destroys your credibility and argument before the rest of your words have even been read. This is disappointing as you do make good points later on (the same points people above you have been making).
If you wish to make a point, trim down the unnecessary commentary and attacks; you'll get more positive feedback that way. G R E E N E R 18:41, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- What Greener said. I had to read your post three times before I realized you had a constructive point hidden within the filler. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 21:24, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
- I was speaking the truth. I've never seen Wyn admit she was wrong about anything, or treat non-admins or non-former admins with anything but disdain. Basically, anyone who disagrees with her. --Nathe 17:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Strange, I have never had any trouble with her. Must be because I have been such a likable person in the past few months... Koda
18:50, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- One person does not prove anything, Koda. Every time I've seen her say anything on here she's been abrasive and disdainful and not even willing to listen to what others are trying to say. --Nathe 20:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- I think her method of communication is a bit "blunt" but they are not attacks. If you have issues with certain people at the wiki, I'd suggest that you vent your frustration in a manner that doesn't involve the wiki. This wiki is not very tolerant of interpersonal conflicts and before you escalate anything or say anything, just take a deep breath, take a break, eat something tasty, watch a funny show, go jogging, have drinks with friends, and come back and make a reply, or better yet just drop it. --Lania 23:54, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Nathe, I only treat people who absolutely refuse to listen to reason with disdain and contempt. You may not have noticed the history of ArenaNet staff here on the wiki, because you are so busy harassing them, but it's people exactly like you that think they are entitled to personal responses to everything they say that have driven Izzy, Linsey, and Regina off of this wiki. We (the wiki community) spent 3 months working with them to design the Feedback namespace to give players a place to put their ideas/suggestions for the game where developers could read them as they had time, or were working on specific updates without all the clutter of off topic crap that fills most talk page discussions. No one was ever promised a commentary, but there have been a few, and there have been several things incorporated into the game that were suggested by users in the feedback space. Your absolute refusal to utilize that system due to some over blown sense of entitlement is simply going to end up driving John off the wiki as well. You were warned repeatedly about misuing Linsey's page, not only by me, but by others, you've now been warned by Auron. I personally suggest you heed his warning, he's not nearly as nice as I am. Your attitude toward this issue is not only disruptive on John's page, but is ultimately damaging to the entire community because it's going to lead to John leaving us the way all the other developers have. I call that selfish. As I said... become a contributing member of the wiki, rather than a detriment, and maybe I might treat you with a bit more respect. -- Wyn talk 01:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- You refuse to entertain the idea that the feedback space has been even somewhat of a failure. Because you've never tried to see it from our point of view. You've never tried to understand what we're saying, only what you think we're saying. I was merely pointing out why people put their ideas on the talk pages. They want a personal response. That's why they do that. The feedback space is not meeting that need that people have. That is all that I am saying. I'm sorry, but you put a lot of work into something that ultimately isn't doing as good of a job as it was intended to do. Because it didn't address the underlying reason why people were putting their ideas on the talk pages. You were only concerned with clearing the pages up, not addressing the reason they were being cluttered up in the first place. Treating the symptom and not the sickness itself, as it were. I didn't think it was such a hard concept to understand. And the only reason I haven't used the feedback space much is simply because I haven't thought of any new ideas I wanted to put in there. It has nothing to do with entitlement. Next time try less assumption, please. And be willing to be wrong. --Nathe 04:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I see your point, Nathe. We should treat the sickness by amputating the diseased limb. Let's remove the ability for people to make legal suggestions at all. Problem solved. elix Omni 04:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- "They want a personal response." Its good to want things, it builds character. --Rainith 17:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I have no problem being wrong, but given the number of suggestions that are being placed in the feedback space and how many suggestions have actually been utilized, I don't see it as any kind of a failure. It's purpose was to give players a way to post suggestions that the developers could actually use in the game if they chose to. It has done that in a very orderly way. There have been almost no cases of interpersonal problems in the new feedback space that ran rampant in the old system, and the information is organized in a way that is relatively easy for the developers to navigate through quickly. There are very few people who are still posting suggestions on the devs talk pages.... not many of them seem to feel this need you are claiming to have personal comments. You are the only one that seems to be suffering from this "sickness" as you call it (appropriately so I guess). -- Wyn talk 17:27, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Then how many suggestions made when the feedback space was first opened are still being looked at? Can you give me any numbers to show that what you're saying is true? You see, you only made it to help the developers, not us. Otherwise more efforts at helping devs respond to the suggestions would have been made. And unless you can give me specific numbers and data showing the ratio of suggestions placed on talk pages as opposed to those in the space, and also which ones in the space have actually been used and how many, I can't accept what you say. And you continue to refuse to accept that I'm not talking about myself. I don't have any suggestions that I want or need a response to, since most of the ones I made way back when no longer apply with last year's updates, and I understand that. But you will not give me any kind of credit or believe what I have to say. You don't want it to be true. You act as though I put a new suggestion on the talk pages every day. I don't. You don't want to see me as anything other than what you already do, because it would mean accepting that you weren't entirely right about me, which you just don't want to do. Why should I contribute to a place where I've never been made to feel welcome or wanted? Where everything I say is misread and used against me? I've made mistakes, sure, but they shouldn't be held over my head forever just because you don't want change what you think of me. --Nathe 18:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think at a certain point, some people who cling to certain ideals and ideas become so entrenched in it, that they can't think logically anymore. The problem is that if you get fixated with one idea, then you can't see anything else... You can't accept the fact that the feedback space has been and still is useful for Anet devs. You can't accept the fact that most people don't care about a personal response and can't accept the fact that people use the feedback space so that they can document their ideas in a organized manner.... all the while you cling to some hyperbolic notion that "everyone or most people wants personal feedback for their ideas", which is demonstrably false... What's true is that "some people want personal feedback"... and that "some" is a very small number at the moment, and historically, those small number of people was the problem that caused the interpersonal conflicts with Anet devs. Those small number of people that demanded feedback was the motivation for the new feedback space system. Please try to think outside of your box and try to at least see what we're talking about. Also please try not to think that Wyn is attacking you and your character somehow, because she honestly is not. --Lania 18:36, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- I think at a certain point, some people who cling to certain ideals and ideas become so entrenched in it, that they can't think logically anymore. The problem is that if you get fixated with one idea, then you can't see anything else... You can't accept the fact that the feedback space has been and still is useful for Anet devs. You can't accept the fact that most people don't care about a personal response and can't accept the fact that people use the feedback space so that they can document their ideas in a organized manner.... all the while you cling to some hyperbolic notion that "everyone or most people wants personal feedback for their ideas", which is demonstrably false... What's true is that "some people want personal feedback"... and that "some" is a very small number at the moment, and historically, those small number of people was the problem that caused the interpersonal conflicts with Anet devs. Those small number of people that demanded feedback was the motivation for the new feedback space system. Please try to think outside of your box and try to at least see what we're talking about. Also please try not to think that Wyn is attacking you and your character somehow, because she honestly is not. --Lania
- Then how many suggestions made when the feedback space was first opened are still being looked at? Can you give me any numbers to show that what you're saying is true? You see, you only made it to help the developers, not us. Otherwise more efforts at helping devs respond to the suggestions would have been made. And unless you can give me specific numbers and data showing the ratio of suggestions placed on talk pages as opposed to those in the space, and also which ones in the space have actually been used and how many, I can't accept what you say. And you continue to refuse to accept that I'm not talking about myself. I don't have any suggestions that I want or need a response to, since most of the ones I made way back when no longer apply with last year's updates, and I understand that. But you will not give me any kind of credit or believe what I have to say. You don't want it to be true. You act as though I put a new suggestion on the talk pages every day. I don't. You don't want to see me as anything other than what you already do, because it would mean accepting that you weren't entirely right about me, which you just don't want to do. Why should I contribute to a place where I've never been made to feel welcome or wanted? Where everything I say is misread and used against me? I've made mistakes, sure, but they shouldn't be held over my head forever just because you don't want change what you think of me. --Nathe 18:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I have no problem being wrong, but given the number of suggestions that are being placed in the feedback space and how many suggestions have actually been utilized, I don't see it as any kind of a failure. It's purpose was to give players a way to post suggestions that the developers could actually use in the game if they chose to. It has done that in a very orderly way. There have been almost no cases of interpersonal problems in the new feedback space that ran rampant in the old system, and the information is organized in a way that is relatively easy for the developers to navigate through quickly. There are very few people who are still posting suggestions on the devs talk pages.... not many of them seem to feel this need you are claiming to have personal comments. You are the only one that seems to be suffering from this "sickness" as you call it (appropriately so I guess). -- Wyn
- I see your point, Nathe. We should treat the sickness by amputating the diseased limb. Let's remove the ability for people to make legal suggestions at all. Problem solved.
- You refuse to entertain the idea that the feedback space has been even somewhat of a failure. Because you've never tried to see it from our point of view. You've never tried to understand what we're saying, only what you think we're saying. I was merely pointing out why people put their ideas on the talk pages. They want a personal response. That's why they do that. The feedback space is not meeting that need that people have. That is all that I am saying. I'm sorry, but you put a lot of work into something that ultimately isn't doing as good of a job as it was intended to do. Because it didn't address the underlying reason why people were putting their ideas on the talk pages. You were only concerned with clearing the pages up, not addressing the reason they were being cluttered up in the first place. Treating the symptom and not the sickness itself, as it were. I didn't think it was such a hard concept to understand. And the only reason I haven't used the feedback space much is simply because I haven't thought of any new ideas I wanted to put in there. It has nothing to do with entitlement. Next time try less assumption, please. And be willing to be wrong. --Nathe 04:18, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Nathe, I only treat people who absolutely refuse to listen to reason with disdain and contempt. You may not have noticed the history of ArenaNet staff here on the wiki, because you are so busy harassing them, but it's people exactly like you that think they are entitled to personal responses to everything they say that have driven Izzy, Linsey, and Regina off of this wiki. We (the wiki community) spent 3 months working with them to design the Feedback namespace to give players a place to put their ideas/suggestions for the game where developers could read them as they had time, or were working on specific updates without all the clutter of off topic crap that fills most talk page discussions. No one was ever promised a commentary, but there have been a few, and there have been several things incorporated into the game that were suggested by users in the feedback space. Your absolute refusal to utilize that system due to some over blown sense of entitlement is simply going to end up driving John off the wiki as well. You were warned repeatedly about misuing Linsey's page, not only by me, but by others, you've now been warned by Auron. I personally suggest you heed his warning, he's not nearly as nice as I am. Your attitude toward this issue is not only disruptive on John's page, but is ultimately damaging to the entire community because it's going to lead to John leaving us the way all the other developers have. I call that selfish. As I said... become a contributing member of the wiki, rather than a detriment, and maybe I might treat you with a bit more respect. -- Wyn
- I think her method of communication is a bit "blunt" but they are not attacks. If you have issues with certain people at the wiki, I'd suggest that you vent your frustration in a manner that doesn't involve the wiki. This wiki is not very tolerant of interpersonal conflicts and before you escalate anything or say anything, just take a deep breath, take a break, eat something tasty, watch a funny show, go jogging, have drinks with friends, and come back and make a reply, or better yet just drop it. --Lania
- One person does not prove anything, Koda. Every time I've seen her say anything on here she's been abrasive and disdainful and not even willing to listen to what others are trying to say. --Nathe 20:05, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- Strange, I have never had any trouble with her. Must be because I have been such a likable person in the past few months... Koda
- I was speaking the truth. I've never seen Wyn admit she was wrong about anything, or treat non-admins or non-former admins with anything but disdain. Basically, anyone who disagrees with her. --Nathe 17:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
(Reset indent) Nathe, there is no middle ground. It is simply nonsensical to suggest ArenaNet devote more resources to make sure Little Timmy knows his idea for a race of groundhog-men has been read. Your choice is either to use the Feedback space (and improve it if you can), or do nothing. You cannot just say "This doesn't work" and then spend the rest of your time insulting Wyn. If you want things to change, you change them. Stop expecting ArenaNet and other users to do the work. 
elix Omni 19:25, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's that kind of tone that makes people feel unwelcome here and resentful of the admins, because I've never seen them actually try to listen to what people have to say. Lania, where is your proof that most people feel as you say they do? If you're going to make an assertion, back it up. And yes, Wyn is attacking me, because she isn't listening to what I'm saying. She never has. The problem with the feedback space is that it was made with the devs in mind, not us. Not to help us but to help them and only them, to clear off their pages and put the suggestions in a place where most will be conveniently forgotten. Tennessee concurs with me that the underlying need I spoke of does exist and should be addressed. As long as admins view regular members as nuisances to be put down and forced into line, that problem will continue to exist. And I never said the feedback space couldn't be improved, Felix - but done so in a way to allow more response from devs to the ideas. People do want that, regardless of what you think. They want to feel that they are being heard and not ignored, and as it currently is, the feedback space doesn't provide that knowledge in any definitive way. And by the way, Felix, when was the last time the wiki admins ever listened to a single non-admin regular player and really considered what they had to say? How does one person change the whole wiki?
- Another problem, Lania, is that you don't seem to be trying to see it from our end. How do we know the space is working? What proof do we have? Why should we believe in a system when we have know way of knowing for certain if it's even effective? Other than admins' word, which carries little weight because we're likely not allowed to see many of the same figures and logs that they are. So if the truth isn't what they say, they can easily hide it. --Nathe 19:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I can provide a few examples. Pling, after resigning as a sysop, led the Great Detrolling last April. I wrote the guide on block appeals and I've never been an admin here. I'll find more examples if you need them. Also, sysops don't have access to any special logs or information on the feedback space. They really are just regular users with a few special tools. None of them work for ArenaNet. elix Omni 19:47, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- What do blocks and block appeals have to do with what we're talking about? --Nathe 19:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Here's the "hidden" truth: ANet doesn't have the time for all of us and Anet has limited time. So, the feedback space was designed to maximize what they get out of the time with suggestions. There was no expectation about benefits for users. Expecting more is just impractical. --JonTheMon 19:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- You asked when a single regular user has been able to change the wiki. elix Omni 19:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Expecting to be treated as if we're wanted and valued is impractical, Jon? Really? And Felix, I understand now what you meant by that, and I suppose it can happen. When I said people would like a response from Anet to their suggestions, I never said it had to be much of one. It doesn't need to be. I understand their time is limited. I don't think just putting a "yes," "no," or "maybe" on each suggestion based on what they know the Team can and can't do or will or will not do is too much. --Nathe 20:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Because saying "ANYTHING" will end up leading to misconceptions of a "promise" which will lead to more problems later on. Anet takes bit and pieces of feedback and puts it into updates most of the time. Many of the skill updates come from bits and pieces of skill suggestions that people have suggested in the feedback space. If they said "yes" to a feedback then they'll be obligated to do everything in there. If they said "no" then they are obligated to not touch it. And saying maybe is like saying nothing at all. --Lania 20:09, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, saying "maybe" is exactly what it is - they might implement it, they might not. That option is there to allow them to not have to commit to "yes" or "no" if they're not certain, but still provide an answer. The "yes" or "no" would be used only if they know for certain. Why is that so hard to understand? --Nathe 20:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Getting game updates and explanations is "wanted and valuable" enough, especially given the situation. Just 'cause it's not how you want to be wanted and valued doesn't mean that you're not. Don't mistake practicality and a desire to cater to the community at large as being dismissed. And what would you do if 1/2 the suggestions got a maybe (no yes/no's) and your's wasn't one of them? Would you complain about it? --JonTheMon 20:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- As I said, every suggestion would get one of the three responses. It wouldn't matter to me which one it would be for mine. The response itself is what people want. Please try to understand that. --Nathe 20:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, you don't even get a maybe b/c they ran out of time. And then they get busy with an update and don't respond to anyone for a couple weeks. What do you do then? Make them go back over all the suggestions that have piled up in the meantime? --JonTheMon 20:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- As long as they say they intend to get to it when they can, that's fine. --Nathe 20:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I just called Anet and I got an answer from Anet to see if they would answer maybe, yes or no on each feedback. The answer for all the feedback that have ever been submitted is "maybe".............. Don't you see the problem? Saying yes to a particular feedback locks the developer into using that specific set of suggestions to the letter. No developer wants to be locked into or out of suggestions that the community has submitted to them. That's why simple answers won't work. The history of Anet's implementation of feedback shows that they like to take bits and pieces of everything and then change it. And in reality, if Anet did have to answer everything, "maybe" would be the answer that they would give to all the feedback that have been submitted, because they want to keep things open ended, and that's what a smart developer does. :::::::::For example: today, a piece of feedback might sound bad and Anet says no... but 3 months later things change and they want to use a part of it, but now they said no and they would have to go back on their word and vise versa. After a while no one would trust Anet's word on anything... and even now a lot of people have a hard time trusting their "word" already. Why would they do anything to make that worse? In essence even if they had time, they won't say anything other than to bounce around ideas... which are not simple answers. --Lania 20:44, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- And how do I know you really called them? As I said, they would only say "yes" or "no" if they were absolutely certain. Is Anet that scared or apathetic toward us that they don't want to consider what we have to say? Really? --Nathe 21:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- "Expecting to be treated as if we're wanted and valued is impractical, Jon? Really?"Who is it that you are wanting to treat you that way? Me? The wiki community? Or Anet? You would get it from me, if you did something on this wiki that actually contributed to the purpose of documenting the game, or making the wiki better. You would get it from the Wiki community (everyone else posting here) if you weren't so totally wrong about everything you are saying. You probably won't ever get it from Anet, because no one does. For one thing, you are one of 7+ million people who bought their product. They are doing what they can with the resources they have to make that product a reasonably enjoyable experience for the majority of those 7+ million people. They went to the effort of working with the Wiki community to develop the feedback space because they recognized that the players do occasionally have good ideas for their game, but, for various legal reasons, there was no other way for them to utilize those ideas in the game, without opening themselves up to intellectual property rights lawsuits. There was never a promise of a response to each and every suggestion and having any expectation of getting one is unreasonable. -- Wyn talk 21:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know much about wiki code and with all the other stuff going on in my life I don't have much time to learn it. And I don't know what I would contribute even if I did, since I have no idea what's needed or not. And I'm not wrong, not conceptually. You guys just tend to think of things in limited terms, at least from what I've seen, and don't try to explore all possibilities. And if Anet were smart, they would abandon the whole notion of imaginary (intellectual) property entirely, since culture is not property and never will be. Imaginary property causes more problems than it solves. But that's a conversation for another time. I'd be more willing to contribute if I felt my contribution would be wanted, and that I would be wanted. And if I weren't bullied. Please back down and you may get what you ask for. Anyway, that's all. --Nathe 22:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Jon but... You are wanted, but to contribute to the wiki. I do not know much about wiki code either, but it is quite easy to simply edit grammar and spelling and similar things. I'm sorry that you feel you're being bullied, but you're not. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 22:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Until I feel that I'm not being bullied, though, I don't have any reason to contribute. --Nathe 22:38, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I'm sorry Jon but... You are wanted, but to contribute to the wiki. I do not know much about wiki code either, but it is quite easy to simply edit grammar and spelling and similar things. I'm sorry that you feel you're being bullied, but you're not. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 22:36, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know much about wiki code and with all the other stuff going on in my life I don't have much time to learn it. And I don't know what I would contribute even if I did, since I have no idea what's needed or not. And I'm not wrong, not conceptually. You guys just tend to think of things in limited terms, at least from what I've seen, and don't try to explore all possibilities. And if Anet were smart, they would abandon the whole notion of imaginary (intellectual) property entirely, since culture is not property and never will be. Imaginary property causes more problems than it solves. But that's a conversation for another time. I'd be more willing to contribute if I felt my contribution would be wanted, and that I would be wanted. And if I weren't bullied. Please back down and you may get what you ask for. Anyway, that's all. --Nathe 22:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- "Expecting to be treated as if we're wanted and valued is impractical, Jon? Really?"Who is it that you are wanting to treat you that way? Me? The wiki community? Or Anet? You would get it from me, if you did something on this wiki that actually contributed to the purpose of documenting the game, or making the wiki better. You would get it from the Wiki community (everyone else posting here) if you weren't so totally wrong about everything you are saying. You probably won't ever get it from Anet, because no one does. For one thing, you are one of 7+ million people who bought their product. They are doing what they can with the resources they have to make that product a reasonably enjoyable experience for the majority of those 7+ million people. They went to the effort of working with the Wiki community to develop the feedback space because they recognized that the players do occasionally have good ideas for their game, but, for various legal reasons, there was no other way for them to utilize those ideas in the game, without opening themselves up to intellectual property rights lawsuits. There was never a promise of a response to each and every suggestion and having any expectation of getting one is unreasonable. -- Wyn
- And how do I know you really called them? As I said, they would only say "yes" or "no" if they were absolutely certain. Is Anet that scared or apathetic toward us that they don't want to consider what we have to say? Really? --Nathe 21:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, you don't even get a maybe b/c they ran out of time. And then they get busy with an update and don't respond to anyone for a couple weeks. What do you do then? Make them go back over all the suggestions that have piled up in the meantime? --JonTheMon 20:34, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- As I said, every suggestion would get one of the three responses. It wouldn't matter to me which one it would be for mine. The response itself is what people want. Please try to understand that. --Nathe 20:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Getting game updates and explanations is "wanted and valuable" enough, especially given the situation. Just 'cause it's not how you want to be wanted and valued doesn't mean that you're not. Don't mistake practicality and a desire to cater to the community at large as being dismissed. And what would you do if 1/2 the suggestions got a maybe (no yes/no's) and your's wasn't one of them? Would you complain about it? --JonTheMon 20:31, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- No, saying "maybe" is exactly what it is - they might implement it, they might not. That option is there to allow them to not have to commit to "yes" or "no" if they're not certain, but still provide an answer. The "yes" or "no" would be used only if they know for certain. Why is that so hard to understand? --Nathe 20:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Because saying "ANYTHING" will end up leading to misconceptions of a "promise" which will lead to more problems later on. Anet takes bit and pieces of feedback and puts it into updates most of the time. Many of the skill updates come from bits and pieces of skill suggestions that people have suggested in the feedback space. If they said "yes" to a feedback then they'll be obligated to do everything in there. If they said "no" then they are obligated to not touch it. And saying maybe is like saying nothing at all. --Lania
- Expecting to be treated as if we're wanted and valued is impractical, Jon? Really? And Felix, I understand now what you meant by that, and I suppose it can happen. When I said people would like a response from Anet to their suggestions, I never said it had to be much of one. It doesn't need to be. I understand their time is limited. I don't think just putting a "yes," "no," or "maybe" on each suggestion based on what they know the Team can and can't do or will or will not do is too much. --Nathe 20:00, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- You asked when a single regular user has been able to change the wiki.
- Here's the "hidden" truth: ANet doesn't have the time for all of us and Anet has limited time. So, the feedback space was designed to maximize what they get out of the time with suggestions. There was no expectation about benefits for users. Expecting more is just impractical. --JonTheMon 19:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- What do blocks and block appeals have to do with what we're talking about? --Nathe 19:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I can provide a few examples. Pling, after resigning as a sysop, led the Great Detrolling last April. I wrote the guide on block appeals and I've never been an admin here. I'll find more examples if you need them. Also, sysops don't have access to any special logs or information on the feedback space. They really are just regular users with a few special tools. None of them work for ArenaNet.
Practical rhetoric[edit]
The original point of the thread above was to point out that rhetoric is more effective if it remains focused on the stated topic.
Whether observations about other contributors are true (or not), they have no bearing on the original, original™ topic about whether people should be (a) submitting feedback on Stumme's page or (b) hoping for and/or expecting an attaboy. Nathe has an important point about how many people react when there is no obvious response from ANet...and it's gotten lost, in part because of the sheer volume of off-topic material and in part because of the personal nature of that material.
At best, off-topic comments hide one's point. At middling, they distract people by opening up unrelated ideas for discussion. At worst, and especially when the comments are characterizations of other people (true or otherwise), they often devolve into a vicious cycle of snarkiness or worse. (And, alas, the thread above is a perfect example: it no longer has anything to do with Greener's original tip and the tone has turned, so that it no longer reads to me as if people are open to new ideas.)
So, simply as a matter of practical rhetoric, decide what is more important to you: getting ANet (and this wiki) to change the feedback policy or asking people to share your characterizations of other community members. — Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:14, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
A challenge[edit]
See how many feedback space suggestions you can read thoroughly, understand, and comment "yes," "no," or "maybe" on in one hour. elix Omni 20:26, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- So far I've answered 10 suggestions in roughly 10 minutes. Extrapolate from there, and that turns into 60 in an hour. Which could easily be 300 a day or more in an 8-hour shift for Anet and still allow them time to do other things, since 300 is far less than doing 60 an hour for 8 hours straight, which I don't expect anyone to do. At the rate of 300+ per day, they could address all the suggestions currently in the feedback space in a matter of days, a week at most. And I when I was answering, I was also saying more than I would expect Anet to. --Nathe 20:50, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Now using that data and an estimated salary for a full-time professional designer (say 60 grand a year?) divided by 40 hours a week divided by 52 weeks ($28 an hour, although we know that's not really how salaries work), you can figure out approximately how much it would cost ArenaNet in dollars alone to satisfy Little Timmy's desire to be heard. Do you think that's worth it? elix Omni 20:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's always worth it to make your playerbase feel heard, wanted, and valued. Even at 200 suggestions a day, all the suggestions currently in the space could be addressed in two weeks, max. --Nathe 21:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Most feedback entries take more than a minute to read and think about. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Not that I've seen, Mai. I was simply going down the list. They're not that hard to understand. --Nathe 21:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I looked at the ones you visited, and they almost all 1-2 sentence ones. You also commented one sentence to each of them, basically saying "I like the idea." Also, which "list" were you looking down? --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I went down the list in the World suggestions category and answered, as you pointed out, basically just a single line. That's more, actually, than I would expect the devs to say. Just a few words on each one. All of them could be answered at the rate of 100 a day in under a month. That's a little over an hour and a half per day. --Nathe 21:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Another problem that would arise from the "few words" response: The submitters of the feedback would, in most cases, respond to the dev's response, creating a much larger problem than before. So then the developers would have to respond to the submitter's responses creating an endless loop. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- No. See what I said below. I would have the dev response limited to just the one line and have it made known that that is all any suggestion will ever get no matter how many replies there are to the response. Please try to think a little more about what I'm saying. --Nathe 21:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I am thinking. What will eventually happen is that someone such as what you are currently doing will think, "I want more of a response than one short sentence saying 'That's cool.'" The someone else will go on another crusade to get more responce, which will result in the same thing that is happening here. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- What you are saying is you want personal validation. It's not something you are not going to get, at least not from ArenaNet. They simply don't have the time or the resources, but then that fact doesn't seem to matter to you. I'm sure, if you were to offer to pay the salary of someone to sit at their computer and read the 2200+ suggestions in the feedback space, and reply to each one of them, they would probably take you up on it. As has been pointed out, as soon as people realize they ARE getting response, they are going to double or triple the amount of suggestions they post. So, soon you will need to come up with the salary for another person to sit at their computer and do nothing but read over suggestions.... where does it end? -- Wyn talk 21:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- You don't know the future, Mai, so stop making assumptions about it. If Anet makes it clear in no uncertain terms that one line is all they get and nothing will change that, what you say won't happen. And see my suggestion below about a volunteer from the wiki doing the job instead, working with the Team much like the TK does. --Nathe 21:59, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- What you are saying is you want personal validation. It's not something you are not going to get, at least not from ArenaNet. They simply don't have the time or the resources, but then that fact doesn't seem to matter to you. I'm sure, if you were to offer to pay the salary of someone to sit at their computer and read the 2200+ suggestions in the feedback space, and reply to each one of them, they would probably take you up on it. As has been pointed out, as soon as people realize they ARE getting response, they are going to double or triple the amount of suggestions they post. So, soon you will need to come up with the salary for another person to sit at their computer and do nothing but read over suggestions.... where does it end? -- Wyn
- I am thinking. What will eventually happen is that someone such as what you are currently doing will think, "I want more of a response than one short sentence saying 'That's cool.'" The someone else will go on another crusade to get more responce, which will result in the same thing that is happening here. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:46, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- No. See what I said below. I would have the dev response limited to just the one line and have it made known that that is all any suggestion will ever get no matter how many replies there are to the response. Please try to think a little more about what I'm saying. --Nathe 21:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Another problem that would arise from the "few words" response: The submitters of the feedback would, in most cases, respond to the dev's response, creating a much larger problem than before. So then the developers would have to respond to the submitter's responses creating an endless loop. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:37, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I went down the list in the World suggestions category and answered, as you pointed out, basically just a single line. That's more, actually, than I would expect the devs to say. Just a few words on each one. All of them could be answered at the rate of 100 a day in under a month. That's a little over an hour and a half per day. --Nathe 21:30, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I looked at the ones you visited, and they almost all 1-2 sentence ones. You also commented one sentence to each of them, basically saying "I like the idea." Also, which "list" were you looking down? --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Not that I've seen, Mai. I was simply going down the list. They're not that hard to understand. --Nathe 21:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Most feedback entries take more than a minute to read and think about. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 21:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It's always worth it to make your playerbase feel heard, wanted, and valued. Even at 200 suggestions a day, all the suggestions currently in the space could be addressed in two weeks, max. --Nathe 21:11, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Now using that data and an estimated salary for a full-time professional designer (say 60 grand a year?) divided by 40 hours a week divided by 52 weeks ($28 an hour, although we know that's not really how salaries work), you can figure out approximately how much it would cost ArenaNet in dollars alone to satisfy Little Timmy's desire to be heard. Do you think that's worth it?
Outsider looking in[edit]
Hello there, dear Nathe. My name is Infinite, and though my actions on GWW are limited to none, I am primarily concerned in improving GW2W and thus concerned with ArenaNet's property.
I was notified via IRC that you were taking on a stance on feedback which is rather interesting. After carefully voicing my opinions on said chat, I was asked if it wouldn't be better to inform you directly, hence:
"
[22:02] <Infinite> If ArenaNet was to reply to every feedback, it would become the new standard.
[22:03] <Infinite> In return, every person receiving such replies would feel amazingful enough to believe there is conversation occurring.
[22:03] <Infinite> Further locking ArenaNet employees in place.
[22:04] <Infinite> (Which is the exact opposite of what we should try to maintain.)
"
As you can see, having ArenaNet committing themselves into such actions will lead to an eternal paradox (new standard, further locking, becoming a new standard on its own). One way or another, there will be inescapable disappointment. As pointed out by Felix, it is also not the cheapest course of action. Whilst I understand your intentions perfectly, it is simply not an ideal solution to the matter. I hope you understand as well. I do, however, approve of your determination. (Though sometimes it is better to apply it elsewhere, such as this case.)
With regards,
Infinite - talk 21:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying, and thank you for your politeness. But no one knows the future for certain. But again, what's being spoken of by you guys is only about what's good for the devs, not for us. And if Anet's response was limited to a single line per suggestion (and not even a very long one, at that) with no further responses in a given suggestion after that initial line, and if that were made known before such policy was enacted, there would be less friction because people would know not to expect anything more than that. I just don't see how enabling a bit of limited communication is harmful when it would make people feel the like devs actually listen to us and that we actually matter. Again, at 200 suggestions a day, all the suggestions currently in the feedback space could be addressed in two weeks at most. Even at 100 a day, it could still be done in under a month. After that the rate of reply would of course go down, answering only as new suggestions appear. --Nathe 21:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- The only thing Anet has any obligations to is to their parent company NCsoft and their sharehgolders, players that want to buy and play the game, and to their employees. They don't have any obligations to players that want to be "heard" or listen to a QQfest from a tiny portion of the player base. Infinite clearly layed out why these kind of "limited" communication is harmful, and yet you still question it. Seriously, what do we have to tell you to convince you to just drop this crusade of yours? --Lania 21:38, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict)
- It would cost ArenaNet at least (approx.) $1,500 to fulfill this role in its current state. That is $1,500 which could be spent to improve the game in general.
- And do not worry; ArenaNet listens to their community. All that I can tell you're concerned about is visual proof they care. However, I could set up a bot which patrols the Feedback space and answers every feedback proposal with an automated line, depending on how it is written. We matter, and it is that they take feedback where they seem fit that proves this. If they say "yes" to feeback ideal a, they could not adjust variable x or y, as it would be disregarding the lines of the feedback submitted and people would be butthurt.
- In short, it's better that ArenaNet listens to the general tone and does not waste precious time or money on individual ideas. At least to me it is; I am not looking for acknowledgement of my ideals and personal proposals, as long as the game improves in a manner in which my general thought is visible. So to me, I rather they not appoint (an) employee(s) and instead continue to listen to the general sounds coming from the community and go from there. :) - Infinite - talk 21:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Except that the general sounds are disparate and in disagreement. How can anything be taken from that? And Lania, maybe those obligations should change. Just because things have always been done a certain way doesn't mean they always should be. Change and adaptation are necessary for survival. And you still have not given me any proof that the portion of the people here who want to be heard is as small as you say. Infinity, it need not be done by the Team themselves—they could appoint a volunteer from the wiki to do that and work with them just as they have the Test Krewe for testing their stuff. And make it known who it is and that the person speaks for them in the feedback space. --Nathe 21:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- But without insight on all possible changes to the game, how can a volunteer possibly give accurate response to feedback? Equally, how can they be trusted to not relinquish vital information which is not to be handed out? It's a generally risky action. - Infinite - talk 21:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- The Test Krewe does just fine with that, don't they? And if the volunteer isn't sure, all they have to do is ask a dev. Fewer suggestions per day would get answered, but it would be less of a strain on the Live Team this way. --Nathe 22:01, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) x2 Then why are you the only one making so much noise about it? Even in guru, people that QQ about Anet's low-non response to their fabulous suggestions are in the vast minority. No, those obligations shouldn't change. Those are the obligations that put pressure on the developers to make a good game. If they made games that catered to niche crowds with the loudest voices, the games that would result will only appeal to a small group, and passed on by the majority, and the game company goes under. Hiring volunteers like the test krewe wasn't without it's problems. That also takes up time of the designers to coordinate things with the volunteers... again wasting money. --Lania 22:04, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- Again, no empirical proof given. Until you give numbers, your claim has no merit. And again, this is one volunteer, not a team of them. Much less of a hassle. --Nathe 22:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Then tell Anet and say that you'll be their loyal volunteer w/o wasting their time. + i don't need to give proof to something that is plainly obvious. --Lania 22:10, 01 March 2011 (UTC)
- If you make a claim, you have to back it up. Otherwise your claim is invalid. But enough for now. --Nathe 22:23, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Then tell Anet and say that you'll be their loyal volunteer w/o wasting their time. + i don't need to give proof to something that is plainly obvious. --Lania
- Again, no empirical proof given. Until you give numbers, your claim has no merit. And again, this is one volunteer, not a team of them. Much less of a hassle. --Nathe 22:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- But without insight on all possible changes to the game, how can a volunteer possibly give accurate response to feedback? Equally, how can they be trusted to not relinquish vital information which is not to be handed out? It's a generally risky action. - Infinite - talk 21:56, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Except that the general sounds are disparate and in disagreement. How can anything be taken from that? And Lania, maybe those obligations should change. Just because things have always been done a certain way doesn't mean they always should be. Change and adaptation are necessary for survival. And you still have not given me any proof that the portion of the people here who want to be heard is as small as you say. Infinity, it need not be done by the Team themselves—they could appoint a volunteer from the wiki to do that and work with them just as they have the Test Krewe for testing their stuff. And make it known who it is and that the person speaks for them in the feedback space. --Nathe 21:51, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- The only thing Anet has any obligations to is to their parent company NCsoft and their sharehgolders, players that want to buy and play the game, and to their employees. They don't have any obligations to players that want to be "heard" or listen to a QQfest from a tiny portion of the player base. Infinite clearly layed out why these kind of "limited" communication is harmful, and yet you still question it. Seriously, what do we have to tell you to convince you to just drop this crusade of yours? --Lania
ban imo. --128.113.156.167 22:02, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- Why? This isn't happening on anyone else's page, not anymore. This is my talk page. If I can't even say what I want on my own talk page, what's the point of being here? --Nathe 22:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- exactly? --128.113.156.167 22:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- So why are you here, then? My point was that I can say what I want on my talk page. But you missed that. --Nathe 22:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- IP, he cannot be banned for posting an extremely long conversation on his talk page. --'Mai Yi' {TC} 22:09, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- It should be fairly obvious why I'm here, and I was implying that I had already answered "...what's the point of being here?" in my initial offering.
- @Mai Yi: tell your friend Veronica it's time for Hanukkah. --129.161.204.202 22:16, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- So why are you here, then? My point was that I can say what I want on my talk page. But you missed that. --Nathe 22:07, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- exactly? --128.113.156.167 22:06, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
Break[edit]
Ok, I'm going to call for a break from this conversation. Long and short: Nathe, don't post suggestions on staff pages; everyone else, cool it for like 24 hours. Enough ink bytes have been spilled today. --JonTheMon 22:12, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
- I actually don't post suggestions on talk pages anymore, haven't in a long time, so I don't know why I'm being treated as if I put one there every day when I don't. But a break from the convo for a day is fine. --Nathe 22:22, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
