Ironworks Fishing Rod

[liev]

I have been engaging in the discussion, it is your issue if it is not what you want to hear. Raging at someone since they have a different opinion to you is not particularly, how should i put it, noble.

You've responded to actually nothing that's been written. You're just repeating yourself. Note that I've been able to respond to your new posts almost entirely in quotes from my own previous posts. Also, raging is laughable. Any stylized text was simply to emphasize points that have been repeated again and again which you have not once acknowledged.

The fact that you can not accept this is an achievement reward, and not, as you put it, the equivalent of the foragers off hands, is the crux of this matter. If you go to the calamity salavager, it is listed in achievement rewards.

1. I have not once failed to acknowledge that it's an achievement reward. It literally comes from an achievement...the calamity salvager need not be consulted.
2. The entire argument is that because this achievement is so hard to get the rod should either be better stats wise or be more unique in appearance.

You still have to explain how the ironworks is the same as the foragers gear, this is a main part of your argument. One that you have not answered to any satisfactory degree.

It is not a main part of the argument.
Forager's Offhands were only brought up in the first place because you insisted that no other class was graced with something special like the Forager's Rod. I do not agree with that sentiment, as I've already stated. This however bears little relevance to the main argument.
By your own admission, you view the rod as something special. My point from the OP is that it should remain special, if only in terms of looks. As of now, it is special in neither looks nor stats.

I've updated the OP to reflect this.

"Fisher is lucky to have gotten the Ironworks Fishing Rod. Miner and Botanist didn't get anything."

This is a red herring. If you're concerned with fairness to Miner and Botanist, make a separate suggestion thread. The point of this post is that fisher had to work, and work hard to obtain the rod. It is my stance that the rod should at least have a unique appearance if its use was going to be limited to a single major patch.

If you could construct an argument why its necessary for a fisher to have a higher ilvl ironworks rod as part of the game, you would get support. The argument seems to be "i worked for this, its now the second best rod in the game, change it now SE"

1. The OP.
2. Bold and red text obviously doesn't improve your reading comprehension. Let's try font size.

Either:
A) The Ironworks Rod should be made better than or at least on par with the Lucis. It's much harder & more time consuming to obtain, so the stats should reflect this. (Preferred)

B) (In light of how difficult it is to get) The appearance of the Ironworks Rod should be altered so that it is at least worthwhile as a glamour item. It's very plain and boring. There's nothing special about it.

C) Both!? I can hope!

Literally from the OP. Quoted more than once.

If this is how you wish to garner support for your request, you will be facing a very steep uphill battle.
…
Now perhaps stop shouting at people, stop demanding that they immediatly cease any discussion in a public forum in a thread that you created for public discussion.

"Discussion"
That's laughable considering this entire thing can be summarized as
Me, in the OP: I think the Ironworks Rod should be either improved to reflect its difficulty to obtain in comparison to the Lucis, or that its appearance should be altered so that is worthwhile if only as a glamour item.
You: You're wrong.
Me: I disagree. Here are reasons why.
You: You're wrong. (the same points you already made that I already adressed)
Repeat the last two ad infinitum.

A "noble" move would've been to voice your opinion as something other than fact, which you have not done. You’re so full of yourself that you had the audacity to call your initial response an “answer” as if you work at SE.

You came here to argue, and you have done nothing but argue. You don’t get to act offended now because I called you out on it and asked you to stop. Now, I will not grace you with further replies.

[DarkmoonVael]

You've responded to actually nothing that's been written. You're just repeating yourself. Note that I've been able to respond to your new posts almost entirely in quotes from my own previous posts. Also, raging is laughable. Any stylized text was simply to emphasize points that have been repeated again and again which you have not once acknowledged.


1. I have not once failed to acknowledge that it's an achievement reward. It literally comes from an achievement...the calamity salvager need not be consulted.
2. The entire argument is that because this achievement is so hard to get the rod should either be better stats wise or be more unique in appearance.


It is not a main part of the argument.
Forager's Offhands were only brought up in the first place because you insisted that no other class was graced with something special like the Forager's Rod. I do not agree with that sentiment, as I've already stated. This however bears little relevance to the main argument.
By your own admission, you view the rod as something special. My point from the OP is that it should remain special, if only in terms of looks. As of now, it is special in neither looks nor stats.

I've updated the OP to reflect this.




1. The OP.
2. Bold and red text obviously doesn't improve your reading comprehension. Let's try font size.

Literally from the OP. Quoted more than once.



"Discussion"
That's laughable considering this entire thing can be summarized as
Me, in the OP: I think the Ironworks Rod should be either improved to reflect its difficulty to obtain in comparison to the Lucis, or that its appearance should be altered so that is worthwhile if only as a glamour item.
You: You're wrong.
Me: I disagree. Here are reasons why.
You: You're wrong. (the same points you already made that I already adressed)
Repeat the last two ad infinitum.

A "noble" move would've been to voice your opinion as something other than fact, which you have not done. You’re so full of yourself that you had the audacity to call your initial response an “answer” as if you work at SE.

You came here to argue, and you have done nothing but argue. You don’t get to act offended now because I called you out on it and asked you to stop. Now, I will not grace you with further replies.

The responses have been directly in regards to what you have written. It is quite clear they have been.

You call the ironworks the equivalent of the foragers gear the other gathering classes have, this is incorrect. I have argued that it is not, you have not shown any compelling arguments to counter this. As an achievement reward, it is highly unlikly that this is meant to have been a definative upgrade that will stay the BiS for fisher. We were lucky to have been given this in the first place when no other gathering classes were. The fact that you can not engage with this point other than saying its the equivalent of foragers offhands without any justification other that "it was released at the same time".

The fact that you have had to update the OP surely shows you that ther is validity in what has been said. Otherwise why do it. I am glad you have to claify your position. However it still stands that this is a unique reward given to fishers that the other gathering classes have not received. It is difficult to get, but you know, difficulty isnt always gradiated in terms of more difficult=better rewards.

You try to automatically take out one of the main arguments in your OP. However, just because you say you dont want this being considered does not mean you are automatically right. You are stating a premis of your argument, again, if you dont want people engaing with this then dont post on a public forum. My argument is, and has always been, is that it is a unique reward given to fishers alone. It was a reward that was very good when it was released, and it still has relevance. It does not need an ilvl upgrade due to the fact it still has relevance.

Just to make it more than abundantly clear, just because you have tried to take out a major part of the argument in your OP, it does not mean you are right and that it HAS to be ignored. The fact you made such an effort to state this in the first place means that you actually more than understand its relevance.

Now if you havent noticed (and you really havent), the argument is that since the ironworks still has relevance in the game, it does not need the ilvl boost that you are so adament that it needs.

Arguments have been constructed, it is not my problem at all if these can not be handled.

[aerolol]

Just as a side note...
you don't need
"53 big fish total, 357 minimum gathering"
It's actually only 33 big fish total now for Lucis.

It's totally possible to skip the forager rod and go straight to supra.

I know that because that's what I did.

Forager body + forager shoes and forager hat fully melded ( I didn't have and still dont have neither forager gloves nor legs, just regular Fisher gloves/legs with crappy melds) , dodore stuff fully melded too.
HQ Food + Gathering FC buff and I caught all the 3 heat wave fishes needed. And no fish ever escaped =D

[liev]

I said I wouldn’t reply again but I literally cannot… You are actually incompetent……….

1. Forager's Offhands are not and never were never part of the main argument. Their mention was only edited into the OP entertain your comment about fisher getting special treatment with the rod already.

2. The entire Forager's Offhand argument was over whether fisher got special treatment. We argued over this for a time, but: Arguing over whether fisher got special treatment is a red herring and bears no significance to the actual argument. The OP was edited only to call this argument out for what it is, a red herring.

3. From the beginning the main argument has been that because of how difficult Ironworks is to obtain, it should be altered in stats OR APPEARANCE to remain special.
Note that OR APPEARANCE bit. Read it again. You’ve posted over and over and over again about stats, but from the very initial version of the OP and in every post since I’ve insisted that altering the appearance to be more unique would be plenty.

4. Again, The entire “but fisher already got special treatment” argument you’ve stuck to this entire time is a red herring. The argument from the OP never had anything to do with fairness to Miner and Botanist. It’s about maintaining the special-ness of a very difficult achievement for Fisher.

The responses have been directly in regards to what you have written. It is quite clear they have been.

You’ve quoted each of my posts, but you’ve yet to actually respond to any point made beyond page one.

Me, moving on from all discussion of Forager’s Offhands:

We're not going to agree here. (I proceed to explain for the 30th time that Ironworks is very hard to get and that the only value it had, which was as an upgraded main hand, is no longer applicable. I insist that it should at least have a unique appearance to preserve its special-ness).

You, bringing it back up:

You are, quite simply, plain wrong that the ironworks is the equivalent of the foragers offhands.

Me, moving on (again):

(I quote the previous response and explain for the 31st time that Ironworks is very hard to get and that the only value it had, which was as an upgraded main hand, is no longer applicable. I insist that it should at least have a unique appearance to preserve its special-ness.)
This remains true whether you agree with the offhand tools and Ironworks being comparable or not.

You, bringing it back up, after I’ve pointed at twice now that it doesn’t actually matter whether we agree because it’s not relevant to the main point:

It is still not the case, no matter how much you shout and highlight things in bright red, that the ironworks is the equivalent of the foragers offhand tools.

Me, moving on (once again):

(I quote the previous response and explain for the 32nd time that Ironworks is very hard to get and that the only value it had, which was as an upgraded main hand, is no longer applicable. I insist that it should at least have a unique appearance to preserve its special-ness. I state once more that this, the main point, has nothing to do with Forager’s Offhands.)

You, bringing it up again, despite there being no direct mention of Forager’s tools in my previous post, or the one before it:

The fact that you can not accept this is an achievement reward, and not, as you put it, the equivalent of the foragers off hands, is the crux of this matter. If you go to the calamity salavager, it is listed in achievement rewards.
..
You still have to explain how the ironworks is the same as the foragers gear, this is a main part of your argument.

Me, moving on (the fourth time):

It is not a main part of the argument.
Forager's Offhands were only brought up in the first place because you insisted that no other class was graced with something special like the Ironworks Rod. I do not agree with that sentiment, as I've already stated. This however bears little relevance to the main argument.
By your own admission, you view the rod as something special. My point from the OP is that it should remain special, if only in terms of looks. As of now, it is special in neither looks nor stats.

"Fisher is lucky to have gotten the Ironworks Fishing Rod. Miner and Botanist didn't get anything."
This is a red herring. If you're concerned with fairness to Miner and Botanist, make a separate suggestion thread. The point of this post is that fisher had to work, and work hard to obtain the rod. It is my stance that the rod should at least have a unique appearance if its use was going to be limited to a single major patch.

You, bringing it up a fifth time:

You call the ironworks the equivalent of the foragers gear the other gathering classes have, this is incorrect. I have argued that it is not, you have not shown any compelling arguments to counter this.

Five times you have brought it up since I pointed out that the discussion is irrelevant to the main point. Five times you have displayed your severe lack of reading comprehension skill. In case you’re unaware, a red herring is a logical fallacy. I thought you’d understand this, considering your love for logic.

The fact that you have had to update the OP surely shows you that ther is validity

If you'd actually read and understood anything written, the OP was updated to point out the INVALIDITY of that argument.

Arguments have been constructed, it is not my problem at all if these can not be handled.

Literally the only other point you've ever made in addition to what I've quoted about was that retainers can use the Ironworks Rods. This has been addressed and handled repeatedly. It doesn't make you automatically right that you've chosen to ignore or deny all valid counterpoints and instead just beat to death an argument that died at the top of page two.


Now, just to make it abundantly clear:
1. Forager's Offhands are not and never were never part of the main argument. Their mention was only edited into the OP entertain your comment about fisher getting special treatment with the rod already.

2. The entire Forager's Offhand argument was over whether fisher got special treatment. We argued over this for a time, but: Arguing over whether fisher got special treatment is a red herring and bears no significance to the actual argument. The OP was edited only to call this argument out for what it is, a red herring.

3. From the beginning the main argument has been that because of how difficult Ironworks is to obtain, it should be altered in stats OR APPEARANCE to remain special.
Note that OR APPEARANCE bit. Read it again. You’ve posted over and over and over again about stats, but from the very initial version of the OP and in every post since I’ve insisted that altering the appearance to be more unique would be plenty.

4. Again, The entire “but fisher already got special treatment” argument you’ve stuck to this entire time is a red herring. The argument from the OP never had anything to do with fairness to Miner and Botanist. It’s about maintaining the special-ness of a very difficult achievement for Fisher.

[liev]

Inc

"ironwroks isnt the same as foragers offhand this is a main point you cant automatically just get rod of it""
"ironworsk is still useful because my retainer needs it so there's no reason it should be any more special than that because ironworks rod was totally made with retainers in mind and every fisher has fisher retainers"
"i personally am greteful for my ironworks rod unlike you"

isn't that a direct quote? but from which post? answer: all of them since page one

thanks for your input, very good information to repeat 8 times

[Shiresan]

Inc

"ironwroks isnt the same as foragers offhand this is a main point you cant automatically just get rod of it""
"ironworsk is still useful because my retainer needs it so there's no reason it should be any more special than that because ironworks rod was totally made with retainers in mind and every fisher has fisher retainers"
"i personally am greteful for my ironworks rod unlike you"

isn't that a direct quote? but from which post? answer: all of them since page one

thanks for your input, very good information to repeat 8 times

Just by skimming over your last 2 comments, I figured reading the entire thread wasn't worth it. If you want to have a civil discussion over changes, you should be civil yourself.

Maybe people will take you more seriously.

[liev]

Just by skimming over your last 2 comments, I figured reading the entire thread wasn't worth it. If you want to have a civil discussion over changes, you should be civil yourself.

Maybe people will take you more seriously.

Maybe you should more than skim and realize that the condescension began with them. Almost all of the offensive wording is their own, turned back upon them. Thanks for your misinformed input.

[DarkmoonVael]

Maybe you should more than skim and realize that the condescension began with them. Thanks for your misinformed input.

Other than replying by shouting and getting angry, all you have done is actually dismiss information given rather than provide a case against it. It is utterly poor academic debate skills if all you can say is "no this is not the case" without any other reasoning other than "i dont want this part discussed". The foragers argument was created by yourself, after refusing to acknowledge that this is a unique special achievement reward that fishers got that no other gathering class got. Your crass argument was "well it came out at same time as foragers offhands, ergo same thing".

You state in your OP that what you want most of the 2 suggestions is for the ironworks to be brough on par OR MADE BETTER than the ironworks. You said that. Thats the one YOU want. I mean really, how academically inept do you have to be to put that in your opening arguments as the strongest change you want and then act like a diva when people address it?

And since you can not, for the life of anything, provide a non biased account of how we get these rod, here it is:

This assumes that you are doing everything contemporarily and, for sake of the OP biased attitude, getting everyhing yourself, not buying it.

Halcyon Rod: lvl fisher to 50 and then complete class quest.

Foragers Rod: Requires 20 Silver Sovereign HQ. Usually took 30 hours of fishing. This stage is needed for subsequent rods once.

Halcyon Rod Supra.: now according to OP this only requires 3 big fish, we know the ones, they have a high escape rate even at 2.5 BiS. This however is patently false. It require 1 mastercraft demi materia and 3 fieldcraft 3 demimaterias as well. For the sake of this dicussion we are assuming you are getting these yourself. Contemporarily, masterdemis were usually obtanied through GSM desynth. This required it to be at 80 for a good chance. So we have to level up this desynth and then get master demis, so that one hell of a lot of tomato relish to create to turn in for a chance at desynthing it into a master demi. So we shall say 1-2 mil gil to get it to 80 desynth, and the time and effort and resources to craft 10 relishes per SINGLE chance at a master craft demi. For field craft, popular ways were the carbuncle furnishing items at this time, and surprise, gsm can use them (and before anyone sayes, thick rimmed glasses did not come out in this patch). So we have very expensive mats to deal with here, on my sevrer you were talking about 50k-75k per item to desynth. We need these to drop 10 fieldcraft 3 demi materias. We will go with the amount i had to spend , which was approx 30 desynths, so 1.5Mil-2.25Mil. TOTAL: another class to 80 desynth, 1.5 mil for mats for field demis (would cost 3.5-4 MIL from MB at this time, master craft probably cost in raw mats 300k, however as a master crafter, the time spent crafting just for this is time thta i could have spent making a lot of money.

NOW we come to a point, a nice point, where methods diverge somewhat, and allow dedicated fishers the choice, although in 2.4 we did not yet know this.

Ironworks Fishing Rod: requires 106 unique big fish. 2.3 fish can all be gathered in about 4 days. (Personal experience) hiwever this is no where near enough. For the ironworks, you are probably looking at fishing for 3-4 weeks, when the weather conditions are right. This requires you to gather as your gathering class. It is also currently, as of 2.5, not required to catch any of the big fish in the game (neither is the lucis).

Lucis Fishing Rod: OP states "this only requires 30 fish". Not true. It also requires 20 moonstones and 60 Glaciar crystals. So how do we get these. Moonstone drops one per day from ixal delievery quest. 20 days to get those ones. 4000 GC seals from your GC, 80k total, thats a lot of fates, or you can craft approx 130 militia braclets and hand them in, resource rich way of doing this. Glaciar crystals cost 600GC seals each, or drop from lvl 45 fishing leves, reward is not guaranteed. 36,000 GC seals or approx the use of 30-40 leves, perhaps abandoning ones that dont reward them. But 20 fishing leves, if you gather the fish yourself, will take approx 100 mins. So lots to do there.

So what do we conclude from this? Perhaps that SE have given fishers 2 upgrade pathes to choose from right now, one a reward for doing what we do, the other fairly resource heavy? Neither the ironworks nor the lucis rod are required to catch any of the big fish in the game currently. The OP adamantly refuses to acknowledge the complete work that goes into the lucis rod as well, blatantly curtailing information as to suit their own biased argument. Why is this being brought up? Well it leads into the main point that the OP constantly and consistently ignores, as its not an argument he wants to hear:

Multiple rods.
Now we have retainers, we need to gear said retainers. Shall we see what happened when your character hase both the ironworks rod and the supra/lucis, and wants to gear the retainer up with one of these?

Ironworks and retainers: lets assume we got the ironworks in patch 2.4. We have the ability to get 1-4 fishing retainers. We want to gear them up with the ironworks fishing rod. How do we do this? Well we go to the calamity salavager and pay approx 4800 gil per ironworks rod we need per retainer. I love this, it makes me happy

Halcyon rod supra/lucis: So for these, to get them for the retainers, we need to start by purchasing another halcyon rod from the calamity salvager. Then we need to upgrade these, assuming this is done contemporarily. 1-4 retainers with Supra. 4 master demis per rod. Lots of crafting to get it yourself, would take probably 20 specs to get this amount if you are lucky. Thats 200+ spicy tomato relishes. 40 Field Demi 3. Thought the masters was a lot of crafting, well hahahaha. We said approx 1.5 mil for the first 10, so its 6 mil for these 40 O.o. So for 4 more supras you are looking at a minimum investment of 8Mil, plus the 12 big fish needed. If bought from the MB on my server, it would have been 24-30 mil to buy the demimaterias for these 4. This was before the ironworks came out.

Lucis: so we have for this one the need of 120+ leves, or 144,000 GC seals for the Glaciar Crystals. Either 80 days of ixal dailies, maps that have rare drop chance or 320,000 GC seals for the moonstones. Here we also have to get 30 big fish per rod, so 120 fish as well.

So, you seem to think that getting multiple ironworks for your retainers is difficult? Lol

OP, you shout, throw insults around, yet fail to engage with the debate. Rather you attempt to restrict what is allowed to be brought up (this is a sign of a weak argument in the first place. Also, historically, this is what was employed by various totalitarian states in a bid to censor free thought. Look at communist russia et al). My points have had to be brought up multiple times since you fail to offer any other argument against them other than "i am right since i have said so" or even better, bring things up, then complain when people point out that thats not the case, and give an argument against it. This was a perfectly cordial discussion until you lost your composure, not me.

Calling someone incomptant because you can not handle to argument says a lot more about you than it does me.

Point 1). You brough up the foragers offhand in an attempt to state that the ironworks rod is not uniques, since according to you, they are one and the same. This has been shown to be untrue. Shout about it if you want, you are wrong, and you brough this up as an argument to support your case. It was a non-argument as we can now see.

Point 2). Wether fisher get special treatment is part of the debate, no matter how much you try and censor this. We were the only gathering class to get he i80 tool at that time, there were no other equivalents. Why doe we get that soecial treatment then arrogantly expect to be given more with an arbitrary ilvl increase?

Point 3). When dealing with an academically constructed paper (and i am i no means suggesting you post is, it is as far from academic as possible with the inherent biased arguments and the non-engagement of the author and attempt to censor), the strongest arguments are usually introduced from the outset, identified by the author. This is what you, as the author have done, by stating that you would prefere the ilvl increase over all the others. This is what has been engaged with. If you dont like this, then perhaps you should learn how to delineate between the strongest preference you have as the author and other suggestions which you want to have considered on equal grounding. Again, this issue has come from your poor choice of words and communication of your wishes.

4) no matter how much you call the argument that fisher have got special treatment a red herring, you have yet to give ANY evidence of this other than "because i say so". By saying that you wish to retain the special-ness ((sic) author uses a non existent word), you have just defeated your main points, by agreeing with me that the ironworks rod is unique. You can not have the ironworks rod both being special (read: unique) and having exact equivalents with the other 2 gathering classes of the foragers off hands.

Other people have replied to this thread, the majority of them seem to agree with the fact that we are glad to have the ironworks rod, we see uses for it, it is still relevant and that going by this, ilvl increase is not needed.

Again, with the author being unable to engage with the points that have had to be brought up multiple times, he has resorted to shouting, petty insults and the distinct inability to engage with arguments, instead attempting to censor said arguments.

Also, the author has had to, on multiple occasions, update the original piece to deal with the arguments that have been brought up, whilst claiming that they are bad arguments. By doing this, the author is actually showing that these arguments have academic credence, and have to be dealt with. However, what the author has failed to do is actually bring up counter arguments to these that are in any way satisfactory, instead he has resorted to the lowest form of mudslinging, which the audience has picked up on and commented on. Thus, yet again, the author arguments are being greatly diminished by attitude of mind alone. The inability of the author to engage with the arguments in a way befitting the discussion possibly reflects the weakness that is inherent in this argument, as well as the basic agenda that is apparent throughout this piece of work; the author is unhappy that in pursuing this Halycon rod upgrade to ironworks contemporarily, he has had to put in a lot of effot. Now, with apparent changes in the system, this same upgrade path has been eased, and has allowed a lot more people to persue this. Refusing to acknowledge the benefits that the ironworks rod still has, the author pursues the same stale argument that "its not fair", putting the self before the collective.

We have, on all accounts, seen the weakness in these arguments, and can conclude that the authors true intent is to persue an agenda that ignores pertinant facts, and when confronted with said facts, the author resorts to mudslinging and shouting, often times tying himself up in his own arguments, and, given the above, greatly erroding his own arguments.

[liev]

Inc

"ironwroks isnt the same as foragers offhand this is a main point you cant automatically just get rod of it""
"ironworsk is still useful because my retainer needs it so there's no reason it should be any more special than that because ironworks rod was totally made with retainers in mind and every fisher has fisher retainers"
"i personally am greteful for my ironworks rod unlike you"

isn't that a direct quote? but from which post? answer: all of them since page one

thanks for your input, very good information to repeat 8 9 times

yep called it

[liev]

@ All of the other steps for Lucis:

Also, again, to get Ironworks you have to get Supra so you can't pretend that the first three stages (Halcyon Rod, Forager's, and Supra) only apply to getting the Lucis.

From the top of page two.

@ Moonstones and Glacier Crystals:

Does not make the Lucis harder, just more expensive if you're lazy.