Why is Sundering so prized?

This is the cool thing about fallacies and such, you don't have to disprove things that aren't first proven.

Not that I was trying to, I was merely pointing out to two posters who seemed to have completely missed the point of another's post.


Anyway, this bit did make me smile...

...Because...

That's the only thing that's been said regarding you. Ignoring the hyper-defensive parts of your post, the only thing you really say is that stereotypes are usually true... in responce to someone pigeon-holing you as a stereotypical PvP-snob.

Heh, anyway. You seem a little aggitated so I should add that it is/was not my intention to "rattle your cage". There's no need to get defensive, no one's "attacking" you.

*smears an "X" on her door with goat's blood to ward off the Angel of Dea-- Forum-Pwning*

I don't get this part. A sundering hilt/bowstring doesn't modify the looks of the weapon, does it?

I call it 'the 1337 hypochondria', same thing as people prefering gold's over blue(collector)/green.

Evidencing that pvp players are just as hypersensitive... therefore rendering your point moot

about your opinion of the norms. Try to not make idiotic comments relating pve-pvp and you won't have th eproblem concerning the hypersensitivity of a stereotypical representation of a certain playstyle. Although we could argue that the hypersensivity being the first generalisation of a certain group or the remark on this generalisation and again the remark on this remark on the generalisation (and then my remark on this remark on the remark of the generalisation). But it doesn't matter since its the same as the debacle concerning the chicken and the egg and which one was there first. Point is however we are all hypersensitive.

No, not stupid, but singleminded: yes.

Vast majority you might be right although many other posters consider the pvp players to be a bigger group (see one of the threads concerning number of slots). If that is correct or incorrect, I don't care though seeing as its irrelevant. Bulk of the economy for perfects and driver of prices can be argued seeing that it has been the pvp scene that needed these so called perfect items for having all the possibilities to be competetive while the bulk of your so called pve group just didn't give a rats ass since they are nearly as effective without perfects as with perfects (woot i killed that minotaur with 1 stroke less... see how i pwnzrd it...). If you refute this, i would like to coax you towards all the complaints concerning certain equipment not being available through pvp-only characters like the former anti hex warrior item or the ease of unlocks through pvp in contradiction to pve. etc...

Why bother to argue with somebody who made up his mind? It would just drag this person down to the person who is as singleminded to think of an entire group (or majority) as X or Y. And I'm sure you can see the similarities with other generalisations which get punished by certain laws and people frown upon.

wow, this thread has become stupid

the pvp scene has no use for sundering strings, except for switch offs maybe, they have even less use for sundering sword/axe/hammer mods. perfect sundering sword mods don't sell because they are effective, they sell because they are rare, and a lot of pve'ers want exactly that... rare stuff. If that's not why they sell for so much then someone please explain to me why they do...

If we were ever paying for effectiveness vampiric would be the costly one and sundering would be tradable for char carvings... as it is I have to empty my storage if I want to buy sundering (which I don't), and I can pick up vampiric mods for about 5k.

What I hate about sundering is, that when I want to buy a weapon with a nice build in modifier (15>50, 15 stance etc) 80% of the time the idiot selling it has put on a stupid sundering mod to boost it's price, why? Just sell the damn sundering mod seperately instead of ruining a perfectly good weapon and making it twice as expensive in the process... argh, yeah, that's annoying

Argh!! Yes yes! >.<

I didn't ask anyone to disprove anything. I asked for someone to dispute, and to provide some reasoning for said dispute. It should be obvious that there is no 'proof' involved in any of these assertions.

It's simple really. I'm drawing heat for stereotyping the general PvE population as scrubs and/or morons. However *none* of that heat has contested those assertions, at all. If my categorization of the game's demographics are incorrect I would like to know, so I can change how I look at them. However if they *are* accurate, and people simply dislike that categorization, the only proper response is "cry more".


And the only dispute I would have with that categorization would be in the semantics - I'm an elitist, not a snob. Though, as an elitist, I can understand the confusion.


Were my comments incorrect?


Which doesn't make a lick of sense, if you spend any amount of time wandering around the game world. Major cities are so much more heavily populated than the PvP zones that it isn't even funny. I wouldn't be surprised if New Tombs was more heavily populated than Heroes Ascent.

If you went over straight demographics you'd probably find that a lot of people play a majority of PvE, and dabble in PvP with their PvE characters. That group is, for the most part, well described by the stereotypes I mentioned earlier that caused such uproar.


Primarily PvP players have PvP characters to roll up. They don't need to touch the economy at all. The PvP economy is not driving ectos, or maintaining black dye prices. It's certainly not what's dumping millions of gold into single rare-skinned items. It's not driving the market for perfect weapons, not when equivilents are available from collectors and crafters.

Sure, PvP players dump their sigil money into something eventually - vanity, almost by neccessity. But they're hardly a driving market force, especially not on the high end. That market is driven entirely by vanity, be it PvE or PvP, and those with the most money are really the players there:

The 55 HP farmers.


Effectiveness isn't what drives the market. Look at the difference between a perfect, req 7 sword and an identical sword at req 10. For all intents and purposes those two weapons are identical - except for certain farming builds. But as I postulated earlier, the market is driven by vanity, not by effectiveness. Req 7 is *better* than req 10, and people are willing to pay for it. Quite a bit, in fact, because of scarcity.


The hex helm required one to trick out a warrior, which chewed through a lot of gold in the commodity markets - superior runes and weapon upgrades. Requiring that investment drew a lot of complaints, because it was an exception to the rule. Before that helm became dominant PvP players never had to participate in the economy at all. Because of that helmet they had to, and a lot of 'em didn't have the cash reserves to do it.

I don't understand where you're going with the unlock thing because PvP is a better source of unlocks than PvE in general.


...


There are no laws against discrimination. Discrimination is a valuable tool that everyone needs to learn early on in life. There are laws against certain forms of irrational, social discrimination. It is unfortunate that many people are unable to distinguish between the two.

Peace,
-CxE

There is some use to them e.g.

Warrior (you) versus a glad's wearing armor you generally use an elemental type - effectively 20% AP.

Warrior (you) versus ranger - they have elemental bonus armor - So you can Use a sundering for the extra AP.

Yes im aware it still is'nt great. Most I guess would prefer a furious. But for certain builds - I dont know say; low adren farm build :/ where you are spamming heal sig with no attacks like cyclone/hundred (so you would'nt go vamp/zealous) um versus ranger foes.

quoted for truth.

It seems that you almost cant buy clean max, low req 15% anything anymore

I think the question has been sufficiently answered and the thread has been derailed and become a PVP vs PVE argument...so I'll just go ahead and close it.