Level Syncing isn't the best solution

[Reynhart]

Fam, you asked questions to my original post that honestly shouldn't have been asked.

Silly me ! You're apparently plenty happy to "not understand" why the game uses level sync...
And bored enough to come ranting about something you don't even do...

[OurMom]

And bored enough to come ranting about something you don't even do...

Again, this is how I know you didn't read the post I was responding to or that you just simply can't read, not sure.

My post was in response to someone else and it wasn't ranting.

"People don't run roulettes because of X not Y"
"I actually don't run roulettes because of X"

"THEN JUST DONT RUN ROULETTES OMG YOU'RE SO SMART! YOU JUST NEVER THOUGHT TO NOT RUN ROULETTES HUH!?! JESUS CHRIST THESE PEOPLE!!"

Psstt, that's you...that's you...being smart lol.

[Penthea]

"THEN JUST DONT RUN ROULETTES OMG YOU'RE SO SMART! YOU JUST NEVER THOUGHT TO NOT RUN ROULETTES HUH!?! JESUS CHRIST THESE PEOPLE!!"

Well you are complaining about doing low lvl stuff when you queue for something that you know can bring you there...so...

[OurMom]

Well you are complaining about doing low lvl stuff when you queue for something that you know can bring you there...so...

How am I complaining when I'm literally talking to someone about WHY I don't do it.

Complaining is constant griping about it. Me helping prove/disprove someone else's point by stating what I don't do and then providing reasoning as to why I don't (which was part of the point) isn't complaining. I can't complain about queueing for stuff that can level sync me when I said I don't do it.

Our education system at it's finest...

Well, the developers themselves did say to take frequent breaks from the game during an interview. >_>;

Your post came off as, don't play the game at all, rather than "hey take a break". Not sure if that's what you intended.

[HyoMinPark]

My post was in response to someone else and it wasn't ranting.

"People don't run roulettes because of X not Y"
"I actually don't run roulettes because of X"

Hello, I’m the person you quoted. Did you consider the context of my post that you quoted? The person I quoted was specifically insinuating that everyone is discouraged from running Leveling Roulette because they lose their level 70 skills, based on the opening post and how he personally feels. I said that it was disingenous to say that everyone feels that way, or that it’s a majority of players based off of one post from one person. People dont run it typically because they aren’t leveling or don’t need the rewards; and besides those two things, there’s no reason to run it outside of boredom or wanting to help other people.

The logic you used in responsding to me literally applies to how I responded originally:

“Everyone is discouraged from running Leveling Roulette because they lose their level 70 skills!”
“Actually, people don’t run it because they either don’t need the EXP or the Tomestones/Cracked Clusters; it’s generally not because of the sync.”

The first sentence has been that individual’s entire premise the entire time he’s been in this thread. He’s basing his “evidence” on how he personally feels about the roulette (and sync), and trying to apply it to everyone. And then gets defensive when people disagree with him.

[OurMom]

Snip

Yes I did and I don't agree with his "everyone" as none of us here have any numbers. However your post and the part I quoted just went the opposite of him but with the same logic. "Nope people aren't doing it because x but because of y instead". So like the person that posted agreeing with you (that no one seems to have a problem with even though they did the same thing I did, wonder why) I decided to post, and give my reason as to why I do or don't do something.

[HyoMinPark]

Yes I did and I don't agree with his "everyone" as none of us here have any numbers. However your post and the part I quoted just went the opposite of him but with the same logic. "Nope people aren't doing it because x but because of y instead". So like the person that posted agreeing with you (that no one seems to have a problem with even though they did the same thing I did, wonder why) I decided to post, and give my reason as to why I do or don't do something.

And my reason for why I don’t do it is different from yours. I’m failing to see your point, but it seems like you’re arguing semantics. You missed where I never said “everyone”; I said people. That’s not insinuating a majority, unlike the poster I responded to.

[OurMom]

And my reason for why I don’t do it is different from yours. I’m failing to see your point, but it seems like you’re arguing semantics. You missed where I never said “everyone”; I said people. That’s not insinuating a majority, unlike the poster I responded to.

I never said what your personal reasons where for doing it.

You said "people" in this context it's just a more acceptable "everyone". You can't get upset because he said everyone while you do the same thing.

[HyoMinPark]

I never said what your personal reasons where for doing it.

You said "people" in this context it's just a more acceptable "everyone". You can't get upset because he said everyone while you do the same thing.

You’re using your personal reasons to try and disprove my statement, though. Hence why I gave you my personal reason. Personal reasons don’t prove or disprove anything though; they’re anecdotes.

“People” =/= “Everyone”. You’re arguing semantics, and that’s about it at this point. I’m not going to waste anymore of my allotted posts arguing semantics with someone.

I’m not getting upset over it; if you think I am, then you’re reading too much into my comments.

[JunseiKei]

You said "people" in this context it's just a more acceptable "everyone". You can't get upset because he said everyone while you do the same thing.

:thinking:

By definition and no other qualifiers, "people" need not include "everyone." It's simply a non- numbered plural for more than one person and is vague; it'd need the words "all" or "every" or otherwise something of the same ilk. "Everyone" is all persons.