197 réponses à ce sujet

[CmnDwnWrkn]

The hilarious part of this thread, is that the OP tries to make it seem scientific by throwing out these totally bogus statistics.  0.1%, 0.01% - LOL, does the OP think he's fooling anyone with this nonsense?  BioWare will look at this thread and dismiss it simply because the OP is so ridiculous.

Modifié par CmnDwnWrkn, 07 juin 2012 - 03:30 .

[Schneidend]

kr3g wrote...

This thing sucks without cloak. What point of nerfing it?

Hence why people are suggesting that Tactical Cloak be looked at, rather than the Krysae. I tried the Krysae on my Batarians and while it was fun to turn enemies into piles of bloody meat, it wasn't spectacularly powerful. I'd probably have scored higher with my Kishok or Graal.

Honestly, I think Cloak would be fine if it just had a proper cooldown and not this hidden 3 seconds nonsense.

[seedubya85]

i did better with the geth plasma rifle, and thats sh*t

[neteng101]

Apl_J wrote...

I'm beginning to understand, but I still feel that your point is wrong.

We are not entirely that different, but I still feel you're asking for too much to be put into the same bucket, while I want different buckets.  Bad, average, good.  All weapons in the good bucket don't have to behave the same way and should indeed play to different strengths/weaknesses.  But I just wouldn't try to put all the good stuff into the average bucket, or put the bad stuff (like the Eagle) into the good bucket.

First, how does equality in effectiveness turn into flat equality? Think of the Valiant vs the Indra. Their DPS levels are almost identical, yet they are two inherently different weapons.

I agree.  Different strengths/weaknesses, and some Indra balancing, to put it into the same "good" bucket as the Valiant is in.  But should the Viper and Incisor match up to these?  No!!!

The Krysae is different to other snipers, you can put it into the good bucket if you like (personally I can't get myself to like it and not because I feel its too easy, just too slow/clunky).  But the Krysae can't achieve headshots, rather fitting, for a rifle that doesn't ask for someone to aim.  Headshots (and weak points) is the reward for people using a weapon that requires aim.

Why shouldnt the player who can handle the Incisor's kick be rewarded for that work? Why should he have to snipe in the exact same way everyone else does?

Umm, but they are?  Someone's already shown how the Incisor is gold viable even.  And everyone that hates the Incisor just wants to see the kick reduced on it.  I'll always take the Incisor over Widow/Mantis, anyday.  Until I unlocked the good multi-shot stuff, the Incisor was the sniper that worked for me.  But should the Incisor be as good as the Valiant/Indra?  No.

The real problem is when you have a category that really is lacking 3 well balanced buckets.  SMGs and ARs in this game...  the Harrier is the one decently good AR, but its hardly anything like a BW.  And the Hurricane seems to be the only really good SMG.  These 2 categories really need the balance work, but all the focus is on other classes of weapons.

Because, some people get hurt, apparently, when someone else has a good gun that fits their playstyle.  There's people even calling for Valiant nerfs because all they got was the Eagle.  Or the Krysae/Reegar which really have drawbacks when you look at both of these, but they can still be in the good category.  Just nerf the good and make it mediocre (or somewhat irrelevant as happened to the Falcon), but all for rather ridiculous reasons.

I'm not saying there can't either. The Widow is, for all intents and purposes, a straight upgrade to the Mantis. It invalidates it. But I don't feel that the Mantis needs a buff: its a Common starter weapon. And there are terrible weapons. Maybe I'm a bit skewed here, but a terrible weapon to me is one that doesn't reward you properly for the work you put into it. I can keep an Eagle on a targets face all day, but in the end I'll be rewarded more for keeping a Tempest on that enemy's face.

Yes, you will always get "dogs"...  as long as the pool isn't filled with "dogs" there's nothing wrong if you ask me.  The card game is like that saying in Forrest Gump about the box of chocolates.

But that's what you're asking for. Making the lines of weapon effectiveness more clear only add to that mindset. When the Indra first dropped, I remember seeing thread after thread of "Lol the Indra isn't worth the Ultra-Rare stamp". The Indra's DPS rival the BW's and the Valiant's. Now if all three have the same DPS, how do you pick? Yes, you pick to which ever one plays to YOUR strengths best. That's a meaningful choice. How is that one-dimensional?

It isn't.  I view these in the same bucket...  of effectiveness.  But I view the Eagle as a rare/hard to obtain but a perfect example of a "dog" that no one wants.  You can have stuff in different buckets, and how they belong in their bucket can be achieved differently.  That's all fine by me - I say we keep this balance.  Just don't try to put everything into one bucket.

Or how about you demand less band-aids and more actual fixes? Nothing is ever going to get done about it if you sit there and take everything BioWare does.

There's no fix and no such thing as equal balance...  me, I'm just in the camp if something ain't broke, don't fix it.  Doing that is precisely what results in changes, for the worse, that really most people if not all, dislike.

Who's sitting here and taking everything BioWare does?  But I do know well enough, that you simply can't change the nerfers who got hurt cause of someone else getting something complaining, nor can you change the folks who only seem to think there's certain builds/ways to play the game...  so aside from explaining myself and hoping one or two others might see the light, honestly, I'm a realist.  I fully expect more bad to come our way as a result of the noise that BW gets from these forums.

[Lexa_D]

WickedTruth 823 wrote...

look we have enough guns for Bronze and Silver... and sometimes those guns are a bit overkill... what we dont have is guns for Gold... if you wanna run Gold your forced to run a heavy claymore or something like it... or pray you can shoot the head off a phantom thats bouncing around giving you the hand so nothing else works... the Krysae true to its color Card is a Gold weapon... it handles its self well in gold... SAME GOES FOR THE REEGAR... the Harrier was a gold gun til it got fat... i cant deal with it at a 1... so ill wait til i get more...

but we need these weapons to actually play legit since geth got soo many buffs...

sometimes i think these "nerfers" only farm gold and cant actually play the game legitimately...

This saturday on gold I used wraith, talon, hornet, hurricane, harrier, falcon, and finished with a super fun 4-engineer run with scorpions. Learn to play.

[Josh.de]

neteng101 wrote...

Chealec wrote...

Please stop posting, I'm never sure whether you're trolling ... removal of headshots had NOTHING to do with anything anyone said on this forum - headshot damage on primes was NOT supposed to be in the game in the first place (according to the patch notes) - if you're really lucky the "vocal minority" might help get them reinstated.

You can read the patch notes and take it at face value - but the Geth changes all indicate one thing to me...  its the direct result of all the FBWGG whiners on the forums.

If someone disagrees, call them a troll.  Indeed, you are proving your validity rather questionable...  the vocal minority are in essense no better than schoolyard bullies, if you see how they constantly put anyone/everyone that shows a different viewpoint down and try to silence them completely.  You say others don't speak, but actually there are plenty of others that speak up for no changes, they just get drowned out and bullied off the forums for doing so.

You nailed it down with one hit, thank you.

[Josh.de]

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

The hilarious part of this thread, is that the OP tries to make it seem scientific by throwing out these totally bogus statistics.  0.1%, 0.01% - LOL, does the OP think he's fooling anyone with this nonsense?  BioWare will look at this thread and dismiss it simply because the OP is so ridiculous.

The statistics are not bogus, they are pretty exact. Bioware knows that too.
I now that too.
Add something to the thread content or don´t even post.

[CmnDwnWrkn]

Josh.de wrote...

CmnDwnWrkn wrote...

The hilarious part of this thread, is that the OP tries to make it seem scientific by throwing out these totally bogus statistics.  0.1%, 0.01% - LOL, does the OP think he's fooling anyone with this nonsense?  BioWare will look at this thread and dismiss it simply because the OP is so ridiculous.

The statistics are not bogus, they are pretty exact. Bioware knows that too.
I now that too.
Add something to the thread content or don´t even post.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know the numbers were exact.  Please point me to the data then so I can see for myself...

[InfamousResult]

Alright, kid- I can call you kid, right? I mean, you called me kid before you even got to talk to me, so it's only fair, kid.

So kid, let's talk about a couple of things. First, I want to say something- and this isn't actually something you mention in your first post, so maybe you can brush it off, but I feel that you aren't quite grasping it.. So I'm gonna' say it: We are talking on some forums right now. Forums for Multiplayer Discussion. That's what you do on them, and what they're made for.. Discussing the ME3 Multiplayer, and yes, providing Feedback. So please don't think any less of anybody on these forums for actually using them for what they were made for.

Take that as what you will.

Second, the Bioware Staff is not made up of idiots, and I get the feeling you must think they are, if you actually believe that they don't know we are a small percentage of their playerbase. You're stating a pretty big obvious right here. It's like if I made a thread saying, "Hey Bioware, just keep in mind, this isn't a western game, it's in the distant space-future, so please don't include any horses or rustic six-shooters in any future DLC". As if they don't know that.

They know we're a small section of their playerbase. We are the vocal section, but we're still a small section. That does NOT, however, mean that they shouldn't listen to these forums.

Bioware understands their weapons and classes- and the game, as a whole- isn't perfect coming straight out of the box. They understand that guns and powers still need Buffs and Nerfs and that there still needs to be balance. That's why we have Balance Updates every week. Hell, that's why we have Balance Updates at all. They're Game Developers, but they aren't perfect.. Nobody is.

But because they're Game Developers, they also know to take what we say with a grain of salt. They watch these forums. They aren't just going to go nerf a gun because one or two guys posted threads saying "hey man shotguns do too much damage up close", or something off-the-wall like that. But, kid, let me tell you what they SHOULD pay attention to: When their forums suddenly become overflowing, day-after-day, with threads talking about how a gun / class / combination is suddenly very OP; a number of threads calling for a nerf that was unprecedented by previous standards, and these threads are actually long, and constructive, and full of good reasons? They should take notice of that.

Because, whether we all a small number of players, we are still players. We are still playing. We still have eyes to see with, and we can tell them of our experiences, and let them draw from that what they will. And they, being the Game Developers of this game- Game Developers that you obviously think know what they're doing, and you enjoy their work, or else you wouldn't be playing the game they developed- know what's best for the Game Balance. So if they look at what we're saying, and they come to the conclusion that it's what's best for the Balance of the game, then so be it.

I hope you can understand, kid.

[Josh.de]

LoboFH wrote...

You guys really don't get it.

Simple and slow for dummies...

Krysae is a noob tube, logically it's loved by the sociologic group called in its name. But experienced players hate noob tubes.

Nobody cares if the Black Widow is a death machine, every game needs the ultimate sniper rifle, Black Widow is the ultimate sniper rifle in this game.

Nobody cares if the Geth shotgun, or Reegar, or Claymore are death machines, every game need killer shooties. John Carmack, the guru of shooters, once said a shooter is so good as good it is its shootie.

Nobody cares if the Carnifex is a death machine, every game needs its .44 magnum.

But everybody but noobs hate noob tubes, with no cons or skill involved.

Now?

Well said, Krysae is a noob tube, the right noob tube for me, as I shoot with it like a noob, so I hit only the 3rd shot sometimes only the 4th hahaha, not kidding here  :-)
Geth even dodge incoming "bullets" of the Krysae when fired over longer ranges. It´s fun, but not effective for me.

Modifié par Josh.de, 07 juin 2012 - 03:59 .

[Mozts]

The 'kids' are among the greatest players here.

Stardusk made a lot of good guides for classes nobody use. Wants a Reegar nerf.

GodlessPaladin made some great Speed Runs and guides, sure proved his skill with videos. Wants a Krysae nerf.

Grimy Bunip have his share of work in various data collections of the game. He understand the math behind the game. Wants a Krysae nerf.

Kids? They are whining with anti-nerfs threads.

Modifié par Mozts, 07 juin 2012 - 04:08 .

[niripas]

Please, don't change the gun that actually has pretty high "fun factor". I just like to play it. If I'm going for serious match - I'm getting my BW out, but sometimes it feels like work. Krysae just makes me smile when I see Phantom "pew pew, bum bum, dead", or rocket shootout vs geth rocket trooper.

[Chealec]

neteng101 wrote...

Apl_J wrote...

I'm beginning to understand, but I still feel that your point is wrong.

We are not entirely that different, but I still feel you're asking for too much to be put into the same bucket, while I want different buckets.  Bad, average, good.  All weapons in the good bucket don't have to behave the same way and should indeed play to different strengths/weaknesses.  But I just wouldn't try to put all the good stuff into the average bucket, or put the bad stuff (like the Eagle) into the good bucket.

First, how does equality in effectiveness turn into flat equality? Think of the Valiant vs the Indra. Their DPS levels are almost identical, yet they are two inherently different weapons.

I agree.  Different strengths/weaknesses, and some Indra balancing, to put it into the same "good" bucket as the Valiant is in.  But should the Viper and Incisor match up to these?  No!!!

The Krysae is different to other snipers, you can put it into the good bucket if you like (personally I can't get myself to like it and not because I feel its too easy, just too slow/clunky).  But the Krysae can't achieve headshots, rather fitting, for a rifle that doesn't ask for someone to aim.  Headshots (and weak points) is the reward for people using a weapon that requires aim.

Why shouldnt the player who can handle the Incisor's kick be rewarded for that work? Why should he have to snipe in the exact same way everyone else does?

Umm, but they are?  Someone's already shown how the Incisor is gold viable even.  And everyone that hates the Incisor just wants to see the kick reduced on it.  I'll always take the Incisor over Widow/Mantis, anyday.  Until I unlocked the good multi-shot stuff, the Incisor was the sniper that worked for me.  But should the Incisor be as good as the Valiant/Indra?  No.

The real problem is when you have a category that really is lacking 3 well balanced buckets.  SMGs and ARs in this game...  the Harrier is the one decently good AR, but its hardly anything like a BW.  And the Hurricane seems to be the only really good SMG.  These 2 categories really need the balance work, but all the focus is on other classes of weapons.

Because, some people get hurt, apparently, when someone else has a good gun that fits their playstyle.  There's people even calling for Valiant nerfs because all they got was the Eagle.  Or the Krysae/Reegar which really have drawbacks when you look at both of these, but they can still be in the good category.  Just nerf the good and make it mediocre (or somewhat irrelevant as happened to the Falcon), but all for rather ridiculous reasons.

I'm not saying there can't either. The Widow is, for all intents and purposes, a straight upgrade to the Mantis. It invalidates it. But I don't feel that the Mantis needs a buff: its a Common starter weapon. And there are terrible weapons. Maybe I'm a bit skewed here, but a terrible weapon to me is one that doesn't reward you properly for the work you put into it. I can keep an Eagle on a targets face all day, but in the end I'll be rewarded more for keeping a Tempest on that enemy's face.

Yes, you will always get "dogs"...  as long as the pool isn't filled with "dogs" there's nothing wrong if you ask me.  The card game is like that saying in Forrest Gump about the box of chocolates.

But that's what you're asking for. Making the lines of weapon effectiveness more clear only add to that mindset. When the Indra first dropped, I remember seeing thread after thread of "Lol the Indra isn't worth the Ultra-Rare stamp". The Indra's DPS rival the BW's and the Valiant's. Now if all three have the same DPS, how do you pick? Yes, you pick to which ever one plays to YOUR strengths best. That's a meaningful choice. How is that one-dimensional?

It isn't.  I view these in the same bucket...  of effectiveness.  But I view the Eagle as a rare/hard to obtain but a perfect example of a "dog" that no one wants.  You can have stuff in different buckets, and how they belong in their bucket can be achieved differently.  That's all fine by me - I say we keep this balance.  Just don't try to put everything into one bucket.

Or how about you demand less band-aids and more actual fixes? Nothing is ever going to get done about it if you sit there and take everything BioWare does.

There's no fix and no such thing as equal balance...  me, I'm just in the camp if something ain't broke, don't fix it.  Doing that is precisely what results in changes, for the worse, that really most people if not all, dislike.

Who's sitting here and taking everything BioWare does?  But I do know well enough, that you simply can't change the nerfers who got hurt cause of someone else getting something complaining, nor can you change the folks who only seem to think there's certain builds/ways to play the game...  so aside from explaining myself and hoping one or two others might see the light, honestly, I'm a realist.  I fully expect more bad to come our way as a result of the noise that BW gets from these forums.

Apolgies for the big quote .... I was actually kinda with you up until the last paragraph, you almost got through a whole post being logical and reasoned without any name calling or anything, if you'd just left that last paragraph off it would have been one of the better, more reasoned posts against nerfing.

To extend your bucket metaphor, lets say we have 3 groups of buckets, one for weapons another for powers and another for synergy - that way things aren't quite as clear cut.

Take Marksmanship and the Viper:
Marksmanship is a good skill.
The Viper is an OK sniper rifle.
The Viper WITH Marksmanship is actually pretty good, not godlike but a decent synergy.

Now take Tactical Cloak and the Krysae (and this is where we'll definitely disagree)
Tactical Cloak is a good skill (one of the best)
The Krysae is a good sniper rifle (one of the best)
The Krysae WITH Tactical Cloak damage buffs is way OP (IMO).

[InfamousResult]

niripas wrote...

Please, don't change the gun that actually has pretty high "fun factor". I just like to play it. If I'm going for serious match - I'm getting my BW out, but sometimes it feels like work. Krysae just makes me smile when I see Phantom "pew pew, bum bum, dead", or rocket shootout vs geth rocket trooper.

Sorry, man. If you can't have fun by actually trying at the game, and the Krysae gets taken down a few notches- I suggest going to Bronze. And that's not me saying "ohhh dude you suuuuuck you need to go to Brooooonze"; no, I just mean that if trying hard makes the game unfun for you, then you shouldn't just be playing harder difficulties. You don't have to prove anything by playing Gold ( or Silver ) all the time. Go play some easier stuff when you just wanna' let off some steam. Lot of players do it.

Gold, being the hardest difficulty, though- still needs to be hard.

Modifié par InfamousResult, 07 juin 2012 - 04:13 .

[Haersvaelg]

A very flawed argument. A lot of the people arguing for the toning down of krysae and reegar also want buffs to some or many of the inferior weapons.

Referring to people who thinks that balance is also important in a coop game and/or who wants specific stuff toned down uniformly as 'Nerfers' is just a fallacy, and the whole idea that 'these people' are only interested in nerfing anything good is almost beyond a strawman in its disingenuity.

The whole idea of balance in a coop game in my mind is to promote diversity in that as many possible build and weapons are viable, without them just being identical. If certain options, be it classes or weapons or some other thing, are straight out superior to the rest by a certain magnitude, that diversity will most likely be much smaller than otherwise.

[Doc-Jek]

I haven't really been vocal about the Krysae, but I don't think a nerf would be unwarranted... Sure, people can say "Why nerf guns in a coop game" etc, but most of the people saying this seem to be only concerned with getting the games done as quickly as possible so they can farm their credits as efficiently as possible... I've been a few games with everyone except me using the Krysae, and it's extremely difficult for me to find anything to kill... I play the game more for the fun of killing the things than gold farming, so not being able to enjoy myself in games like these is a big offputting factor for the game. I've found myself getting frustrated with ME3 multiplayer at times like this and I can imagine I'm not the only one. I think it would have been fine if they had started it off as ultra rare, but not much they can do about all the hordes that already have Krysae X. It certainly wouldn't be fair to make it more rare for future players, and it would also be unfair to take away their unlocks of the weapon.

Modifié par Doc-Jek, 07 juin 2012 - 04:20 .

[Pitznik]

InfamousResult wrote...

niripas wrote...

Please, don't change the gun that actually has pretty high "fun factor". I just like to play it. If I'm going for serious match - I'm getting my BW out, but sometimes it feels like work. Krysae just makes me smile when I see Phantom "pew pew, bum bum, dead", or rocket shootout vs geth rocket trooper.

Sorry, man. If you can't have fun by actually trying at the game, and the Krysae gets taken down a few notches- I suggest going to Bronze. And that's not me saying "ohhh dude you suuuuuck you need to go to Brooooonze"; no, I just mean that if trying hard makes the game unfun for you, then you shouldn't just be playing harder difficulties. You don't have to prove anything by playing Gold ( or Silver ) all the time. Go play some easier stuff when you just wanna' let off some steam. Lot of players do it.

Gold, being the hardest difficulty, though- still needs to be hard.

That is an important thing to understand. You're not entintled to win gold just by buying the game. Gold is for those who can beat it, not for everyone. If you want to win Gold, you should be a Gold player, and put some effort into survival, aiming and playing. And this is not an elitist viewpoint - I play silver, just because I want my games to be more relaxed, and because I like to run around the map shooting stuff, instead of moving as a team.

[BooBooXZ]

The main problem of the krysae is stat for stat it's better than a Black Widow, it's like making the paladin a silver gun and having the carnifex as gold still. It just doesn't make sense.

[MajorBlazkowicz]

Frost Spectre wrote...

Only things Krysae needs is to actually use the charging as to pump up the damage, removal of proximity explosion and "sniper rifle hip fire debuff" which is on every other sniper rifle.

"sniper rifle hip fire debuff" < it already has this.........

[capn233]

BooBooXZ wrote...

The main problem of the krysae is stat for stat it's better than a Black Widow, it's like making the paladin a silver gun and having the carnifex as gold still. It just doesn't make sense.

Especially if you also gave Paladin exploding rounds.



I find the Krysae sort of irritating to use, but sadly it is still effective.  It isn't just imba on infiltrators, any small amount of logic can figure this out.  More damage, less weight, less rarity, and AOE effect compared to Black Widow, for instance.  And that is on paper.  If enemies clump damage output is scaled up massively.

Claiming that it is hard to see the difference on the non-combat classes is silly anyway, as the heavy SR's are all pretty bad on casters no matter the build, although I still think it is a dubious claim that you can't tell that the Krysae is more effective on them as well.  It is certainly more effective than BW on Infiltrator or Soldier because the damage bonuses do indeed magnify the damage.  Indeed ARush is really an interesting way to use this gun that seems a little off to me.

All in all it could use some tweaks to damage output and or weight.  If you were going to completely reengineer the weapon, then switching it to single shot with slightly more damage and explosion only on contact with an enemy would make it pretty neat.   And it could remain potentially balanced if it didn't do Widow or Javelin damage per shot.

Modifié par capn233, 07 juin 2012 - 04:44 .

[Geek]

Again I think the main problem with the krysae is the way it gets around the limitations of the infiltrator. All snipers can get a 40% damage bonus, but they are balanced by the shield gate that doesn't effect the krysae. You can get around the shield gate with a shotgun but you don't get the same damage bonus. Most guns require a decent shot where the krysae is just shoot it into a group.

[Fioxnoa]

XxTaLoNxX wrote...

Consider the following.

It takes one shot to kill a Troop on Gold as an Infiltrator.
It takes two shots to kill a Troop on Gold as an AR Hsol.
It takes three shots for everyone else.

For a sniper rifle... is that truly OP? Is it the gun itself that is OP or is there another force at work in the game (Tactical Cloak) that is pushing the rifle into the realm of "too powerful"?

Trakarg wrote...

The tears will be delicious when this gun gets nerfed.

How about you use something that requires you to aim, people? The black widow is far more interesting than the krysae.

That's you personal opinion. And to be honest you are a minority among the minority. More people here actually like the Krysae and don't want it nerfed at all.

The extremely vocal, extreme minority here is what is going to get this rifle ruined for everyone else. Because they can't cope. They probably don't play well with others either.

Talon gets it

Modifié par Fioxnoa, 07 juin 2012 - 06:24 .

[ol MISAKA lo]

Lexa_D wrote...

WickedTruth 823 wrote...

look we have enough guns for Bronze and Silver... and sometimes those guns are a bit overkill... what we dont have is guns for Gold... if you wanna run Gold your forced to run a heavy claymore or something like it... or pray you can shoot the head off a phantom thats bouncing around giving you the hand so nothing else works... the Krysae true to its color Card is a Gold weapon... it handles its self well in gold... SAME GOES FOR THE REEGAR... the Harrier was a gold gun til it got fat... i cant deal with it at a 1... so ill wait til i get more...

but we need these weapons to actually play legit since geth got soo many buffs...

sometimes i think these "nerfers" only farm gold and cant actually play the game legitimately...

This saturday on gold I used wraith, talon, hornet, hurricane, harrier, falcon, and finished with a super fun 4-engineer run with scorpions. Learn to play.

Learn to be a little more tolerant of others and not be such an elitist. It isn't an attractive quality.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opinion:
At risk of sounding like an insane person, I believe that the Krysae could stand to lose some damage (maybe 10-15%) and still be fine. I have played with this gun since level I and continued to play with it through to where it is now for me (level IX) and I have seen its evolution in power. It is more rediculus of a power-creep gun than reminds me (in a wierd way ) the warped gamestate of the Yu-Gi-oh! TCG/OCG.

The notion that it is only good on an infiltrator is very inaccurate. At mid rank and beyond (V - X) the gun is very workable on other classes, even classes that need-not be using a sniper rifle. It may be a matter of skill in this regards, but I digress...

[BjornDaDwarf]

I'm sure this has been pointed out, but OP, you're falling for a traditional logical fallacy. Just because the majority is silent, it does not mean that they agree with you, or that they disagree with the Vocal Minority. They are silent, hence, we do not know what they think. In all reality, I'm sure there is a wide range of opinions on the Krysae in the Silent Majority, that range from hating it and wanting it gone to loving it and only playing with it. And everything in between.

[greghorvath]

[quote]GodlessPaladin wrote...
 Yet another clearly disingenuous statement.  You make a barely veiled jab at my intelligence[/quote] no, no, no, no. I see where my post seems offensive, but I really meant no insult or disrespect. Sorry for this, mate. No offense intended. 

Don't take it personally, man. We both are on on a hypothetical level here.

[quote]And despite you claiming that this view is held by "most people" I've yet to see a single person in the world who actually wanted that.  I've seen people who said other people wanted that but none who actually said that they themselves wanted that, either here on BSN or in any other context, anywhere, ever.[/quote] We obviously stumble into different threads. You will excuse me for not looking for any examples as I find enough manure on the BSN without actually looking for it... I don't actually recall ever saying most people thinks the way I do about the concept people call "balance". Most of the time people think quite differently from how I do.
[quote]
[quote]I like the word nebulous though. I seriously wish I knew what it meant...[/quote]*facedesk* [/quote]

[/quote] I don't even know the meaning of all words in my own language, let alone English... I have to say in my defense that I did google it...

Modifié par greghorvath, 07 juin 2012 - 08:22 .