Significant decrease in Materials from Gathering Favors - Patch 3.07

[TechnoTechie]

Uhm............
In English classes? In school? I mean this is really, really, basic (? or intermediar?) English. How exactly does one argue the rules of a language? Why would someone argue the rules of a language?

because English is an ambiguous language, one that doesn't translate directly into particular meanings. I say this because phrases can have multiple meanings depending on context. "Increased by" is one particular phrase, because there is a difference when you mean to enact upon something (to increase a value by x%) versus displaying the result of a change (the value was increased by x%).

Are sure about that? Because I don't need to use external links to prove basic math. And math was my weakest class in college.

This was never about basic math. It was about an interpretation of English into Math, and I was using the external link to provide an example of an interpretation. Here is another such source that describes perfectly why they can write that it was "increased by 300%" and still mean that it was only tripled, not quadrupled. (e.g. if you increase something by 200%, the end result is that it was increased by 300%)

This entire discussion is unnecessary. But I tried to find an explaination anyway, on how it's possible that people would argue basic math or English, but in response to your query, it's because people forget the basics all of the time and sometimes need to be reminded of them.

I was referring to your demeaning comment. Those are quite unnecessary.

[Roth_Trailfinder]

(e.g. if you increase something by 200%, the end result is that it was increased by 300%)

I would not have a problem with your e.g. if you used To instead of By. Increasing something by both X and Y do not give you the same result unless X and Y are equal. You can, however, increase something BY X, with the result that you increased that something TO Y. Edit - Somehow I read that earlier as both numbers being 300%, which would be incorrect in the manner I've described here. HOWEVER - the second should still be "to" rather than "by". the reason is that the use of the word "by" means that you are still taking the base amount and adding whatever to it, in this case, the first is adding 200% to it, the second is adding 300% to it. Neither one tells what the actual total is. /Edit

English itself is less ambiguous than people use it to be. There are a lot of contextual meaning changes, but without that context (such as the patch notes simply making a statement out of the blue, the chance of the node appearing has been increased by 300%) there can be no such contextual meaning change.

As such, the patch notes were in error, either in the English notes (which state an increase of 300%) or the other language patch notes (which state the chance was tripled). Reports suggest the English notes were the ones in error.

[StouterTaru]

because English is an ambiguous language, one that doesn't translate directly into particular meanings. I say this because phrases can have multiple meanings depending on context. "Increased by" is one particular phrase, because there is a difference when you mean to enact upon something (to increase a value by x%) versus displaying the result of a change (the value was increased by x%).

So increased by 50% means the same thing as decreased by 50%, aka halved?

[BonzaiFerroni]

As much as you would like to claim that there is a precise meaning to the phrase, the reality is that it is used inconsistently. I'm not sure how much clearer this can be, given the fact that it wasn't used according to the convention in this case. There is no need to be condescending to people, it isn't a matter of mathematical skill or language skill here. If you are really interested in shaming someone, the most you can say in this case is "they used the phrase inconsistently with convention!"

The moral of the story is that if you want to be precise, you should probably avoid the phrase altogether or include enough additional information to make it clear. Even if you are using it correctly, there are enough people out there using it incorrectly to give the reader some doubt, no matter how familiar with they are with English/math. As some others have pointed out, there are tons of ways to say it more clearly.

Let's try to keep these forums a positive place, and if we are going to argue, let's argue about something important like who would win in a fight between Merlwyb and Raubahn?

[Alistaire]

the reality is that it is used inconsistently.

Exactly...sitting here in shock about the fact this argument's even still going on.

This thread's already been linked in a couple of forums that poke fun at some of the ridiculousness that goes on here; but seeing it still on the front page now is especially laughable.

[Duuude007]

I've only done 3 sets since patch, but the amounts gathered so far were 16, 19 & 20. This is too small a sample to draw any meaningful conclusion really, but leans towards a slightly lower yield than before.

Underlined for emphasis.

I have not missed a single favor since red scrips were implemented, and can confirm a net zero change to the red scrip tokens spent and the materials realized through favors.

Just this week my record was (in 5 favors):

28 Bladeleaf
9 Swordleaf

Average seems to be around 20 (With a margin of error + or - 10) for 5 favors, just like it was prepatch. RNG will skew that value up and down, but with large enough sample size (30+ tokens worth), it is easy to calculate a more consistent dividend.

[Aeyis]

As much as you would like to claim that there is a precise meaning to the phrase, the reality is that it is used inconsistently.

The reality is that this only applies to those that don't understand English well enough. As Roth mentioned above and others have explained, English isnt as ambiguous in this case as people in this thread make it out to be.


It's simply some people arguing that their lack of English understanding means ''English is ambiguous''

''to'' and ''by'' mean different things. It is that simple. This is basic English. My earlier argument was not an insult as apparently it seems to be taken. This level of English is just that basic.


''you fill a glass to full''
''you fill a glass by filling it with water''
The different meaning of ''to'' and ''by'' can be infered by the different use of grammar in the two sentences.



''The yield of Favor items has been increased to 300% of the old value''
And everything after ''to 300%'' isn't even needed either.

I was referring to your demeaning comment. Those are quite unnecessary.

It wasnt a demeaning comment. Perhaps you felt that it was, but it truly is basic English.

It was about basic math because you claimed the math used to explain the English used was incorrect.
Again, I also dont need to use links to disapprove you are wrong, because the math also is very basic. Children are taught this level of math (the different between + and x) in their first year of math.

So having (presumably) adult people who regularly engage in forum discussions argue about this is baffling.

Again, perhaps I'm biased since I never had much issues learning English myself..so I tend to forget the difficulties in learning another language. So perhaps the English isn't as basic as I'm making it to be, but more intermediate.

Let's try to keep these forums a positive place, and if we are going to argue, let's argue about something important like who would win in a fight between Merlwyb and Raubahn?

This would be a more positive thread if you *blushed* and realized it's only a small thing to be wrong about. I'm surprised tho, I didnt consider you one to argue over something that cant be argued about.

Exactly...sitting here in shock about the fact this argument's even still going on.

I guess it shows people on these forums truly try to argue against everything.

Remember what it feels like to blush!

[Aeyis]

So increased by 50% means the same thing as decreased by 50%, aka halved?

I do believe that is what is being argued, yes.

[Alexiell]

the way you farm favors is much more important than before now. to get the most out of them you should always prepare 4 nodes so that they have only 1 gathering attempt left before starting the favor. also you should gather only the rare materials from concealed nodes before moving on. making use of sprint between close nodes and mounting for nodes that are further away should be obvious too. I believe doing all this vs just gathering normally can easily increase your average yield per favor by 1.

[TechnoTechie]

The reality is that this only applies to those that don't understand English well enough. As Roth mentioned above and others have explained, English isnt as ambiguous in this case as people in this thread make it out to be.
It's simply some people arguing that their lack of English understanding means ''English is ambiguous''
''to'' and ''by'' mean different things. It is that simple. This is basic English. My earlier argument was not an insult as apparently it seems to be taken. This level of English is just that basic.

The English words themselves are basic, yes, but if you had actually attended college as you had stated you did in an earlier post, I'd expect you not to ignore a reference, and the point of even having them. In said reference, even people with advanced degrees in math agree that the particular phrase used is ambiguous with respect to Math, and should be avoided at all costs because of the duality of the meaning when you start trying to interpret them into Mathematical terms.

''you fill a glass to full''
''you fill a glass by filling it with water''
The different meaning of ''to'' and ''by'' can be infered by the different use of grammar in the two sentences.
''The yield of Favor items has been increased to 300% of the old value''
And everything after ''to 300%'' isn't even needed either.

omitting the part after the "to 300%" is exactly what would make it ambiguous.

It wasnt a demeaning comment. Perhaps you felt that it was, but it truly is basic English.
It was about basic math because you claimed the math used to explain the English used was incorrect.
Again, I also dont need to use links to disapprove you are wrong, because the math also is very basic. Children are taught this level of math (the different between + and x) in their first year of math.
So having (presumably) adult people who regularly engage in forum discussions argue about this is baffling.
Again, perhaps I'm biased since I never had much issues learning English myself..so I tend to forget the difficulties in learning another language. So perhaps the English isn't as basic as I'm making it to be, but more intermediate.

Perhaps you don't understand basic English if you don't know when you are effectively calling someone an idiot or a child by saying that their education amounts to no less than what children are taught in their first years of English or Math. I suggest you go and review, and English is my first language, thank you very much.