{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
12/2/2014 4:57:15 PM
18
OP you raise a great point. To the posters who are rage-replying, I don't think you fully understand the situation (no offense intended here, just trying to clear it up).
It seems whenever someone goes on a "rant" it's usually for a highly debatable context, this however, really isn't one of those cases. The OP is not asking for CRUCIBLE REP/MARKS for PvE tasks. That would be asking for a handout, and would deserve criticism. But again, this is not what the OP is requesting.
Destiny currently has its vendors set up so that you can earn both faction and vanguard rep through PvE, but vanguard marks cannot be spent on faction gear. Why is this the case? In crucible your marks go for both crucible gear, and faction gear. This gives PvP players a lot more variety when selecting what pre-level 30 gear to purchase (or weapons they favor).
Imo there are 3 solutions (the last would not be popular):
1) make vanguard marks a currency for factions so that PvE players can get more armor and weapon variety on par with PvP players.
2) take away the ability to earn some of the factions rep through PvE activities (i.e Dead Orbit/New Monarchy could be vanguard marks and FWC, etc. could be crucible).
3) Take away all ability to earn faction rep through vanguard activities to strengthen the message that factions are PvP oriented and have no opinions on what happens in the PvE elements (this doesn't make sense because, for obvious reasons, the factions would care about the PvE events as it directly effects them).
Of all things left to fix in this game, this seems relatively easy to do, and theoretically wouldn't take much time to do so. Good thoughts OP, a lot of the rage-replies are either PvP fanatics, or have misunderstood your intent.
English
-
To your points made. I can whole heartedly agree with #1. Currently the only plan for getting weapons from the faction vendors is to raise their level through rep to get a package for a chance item. I do not pvp nor think you should get handed pvp marks for pve related activities, however if I can gain rep for those vendors at the expense of vanguard rep I should be able to use my vanguard marks for their items (even though they are sparse). I still have to earn those marks just not in a pvp type setting. #3 definitely not an option unless they supplement more vendors for the pve players. Simpler solution would just be to allow van marks. #2 I mean you could do that, but honestly when I do a patrol the missions come from every faction at the tower. I mean it is silly that i get a mission from dead orbit to collect certain drops and then get +10 vanguard rep for completion. If that is the case then it could be changed that before selecting a mission you know the type and who you are working for. When you accept you get that factions rep as a reward for completing, if done this way they should raise the gain to 25 if you remove gains from completing bounties or heroics while wearing the faction cape The crucible venders should remain that way, I have no issue with that. However we are limited to weapons/armor
-
Uh, you do know you can fork mats for crucible marks right?
-
they took that away in update 1.1. You can use marks to purchase mats but removed the purchase of marks with mats. Not a big deal since it would have been a very very slow grind
-
#2 was a compromise of sorts. I agree that both vanguard and crucible players should have access to the factions' gear. Your point on faction missions is well taken.
-
That's not a -blam!-ing handout, that's how the game worked since release. -blam!-ing kids these days...
-
We're the kids? Kinda hard to make that argument when you argue like a high school raging teen.
-
Yes, because an adult wouldn't feel the need to immediately attempt to establish authority with a false consensus. There no ”we” here, just you and I. Don't pretend like you have some fictitious majority here, validating your argument.
-
So now you want to try and sound intelligent. I, and no on I've agreed with have claimed an authority position. We are recommending a change that makes sense. You have offered no legitimate counter argument. Just personal attacks. You'd make a great politician.
-
Look at that shit, right there. Still using "we" instead of I while simultaneously refuting that you're doing so. That's called "cognitive dissonance."
-
And I'm still waiting for your counter argument. Yet the personal attacks and nit-picking continue. You're just being an ass honestly. I have been debating quite cordially with others on this topic. I never said I wasn't using "we." By "we" I was referring to myself and the OP. Neither of us has claimed to be an authority. You have failed to prove that either of us did so. You only support your position with attacks- this is, by definition an invalid argument. Substituting "we" for "I" does not make my argument invalid since more than one person feels the same way I do. Still waiting for a supported counter argument on the why this idea of vanguard marks for faction gear is silly. But I'm expecting another attack instead, since you seem incapable of cordial debate.
-
Your attempt to deny your use of false consensus is laughable. It most certainly does invalidate your argument as a premise predicated on fallacious reasoning is invalid. No additional counter argument is necessary, despite your protest to the contrary.
-
Edited by l MGW l: 12/2/2014 7:57:17 PMUsing flowery language doesn't change the fact that you don't even have an argument. I tried to give you one with the whole we vs. I scenario, but since you're so keen on attacking that let me enlighten you on something: the term "we" does not in and of itself denote authority or a majority. It is simply using the first person when in a group. I am not the only one I this board who holds my original argument as valid. Many others agree, look at the OP and comments for proof. Therefore, the use of "we" is valid. Just because you have a dictionary and use pretty words doesn't mean you have a superior grasp of the English language. You're just a bored kid/adult sulking in his parent's basement and make yourself feel better by nitpicking and attacking people on forums. Nevermind that you don't have any valid opinions of your own, and that you're incapable of the basic social function of civil debate
-
No, I'm a bored well-paid professional adult in my own living room, sans dictionary using my basic college education in rhetoric to point out how retarded you're being.
-
You have yet to address ANY of my points or arguments. You continue to do nothing but make personal attacks, even after I refuted your silly "we" vs. "I" claim. I highly doubt that you are any of those things. Well-paid professional adults don't act or talk in the way you do on forums. Most of us relax, discuss, and debate. Those who attack have real world problems that frustrate them and have no one to take them out on, so they do so here. I am college student, currently struggling with finances because being a full-time student, division III athlete, and having a part-time job doesn't pay all that well and yet I have a higher maturity level than yourself (a self-proclaimed adult making loads of cash? doubtful). If you think I'm buying what you're selling, you're dead wrong. You are a shining example of my point, so please, keep the attacks coming. You're also a great example of why it pays not to believe everything posts on the internet, because I have serious doubts about any of the things you claim you have achieved. Your demeanor and maturity suggest they are not true. In fact, your behavior today has further justified my cause that you are a witless cyber-bully with no valid opinions. You are basically a high school bully with a better vocabulary. Congrats!
-
Doubt my professionalism all you want, but you're wasting your time in college if you can't wrap your head around these basics of rhetoric: avoid fallacious reasoning, avoid emotional appeals and allow your argument to stand on its own merits. I am not struggling financially and it's been almost ten years since college, but I can spot a poor rhetorician a mile away.
-
You're attacking my rhetoric while using slang and curses in your own? Google hypocrite. Also, I'm a biology major on a pre-med track so I'm really not overly concerned with how well I write on an internet forum. That being said, you aren't backing up any these claims with proof or citations of my poor rhetoric that you so adamantly bash. This is a forum where we post our OPINIONS on the game and debate our OPINIONS with the OPINIONS of others. Myself, and those who agree with me (the group as I was referring to when using "we"), believe these changes to be beneficial. We have given our reasoning for such, and those opposed have voiced their opinions why such changes would not be beneficial. You have done neither. You continue to make attacks with absolutely no support. As a college student your responses would yield no better than a "D" because you are not supporting your claims, only proclaiming them as truth. You have also responded to a comment within a thread without addressing the central debate of either, which is quite frankly, odd.
-
You keep doing it. There's no "we" here. You speak for yourself, noone else. Even if you were the metaphorical mouthpiece of the majority, any argument you made which relied on majority consensus to upgird its premises is, again, invalid by definition. You persist in perpetuating this error in post after post, perseverating to a degree that borders on malign obstinacy. It's preposterous, to be perfectly frank; perhaps even pompous.
-
Edited by noved: 12/2/2014 6:50:16 PMYour funny personal attacks make me crave popcorn.
