- Registered User
Member for 8 years, 4 months, and 23 days
Last active Tue, Aug, 25 2015 03:07:09
- 1 Follower
- 53 Total Posts
- 5 Thanks
Dec 24, 2012Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)Quote from Bagstone
Uh, where did that topic come from? 56 pages and haven't seen it since today.
I remember a discussion in a newspaper about this recently, and someone said this: "If you had proof for god's existence, it wouldn't be called belief."
There is no and there will never be proof, those who want to belief interpret the signs in a way to support their beliefs, those who don't believe in god will argue against it. To each his own, it would just be nice if both sides (atheists and believers) could stop attacking each other.
Best of luck trying to get that to happen!
As long as some people believe one thing, and others believe something else, there will always be conflict of some kind.
That is human nature.
The only way to eliminate the conflict, is to eliminate the entire human race. It may sound a little harsh using those words, but as long as humans exist, we will attack each other over our beliefs...
Dec 24, 2012Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)Quote from Belphanoir
you are not talking about truth you are talking about facts...
Truths are a subjective aspect, as can be proven in many tests. A mentally unstable man will be telling the truth without any doubt when he claims to have heard the voice of the devil telling him to do something... it is not a fact, but it is a truth, to him.
The earth is an ovoid shape is a fact, not a truth. Trying to use the logically fallacies to show god's existence is what you are aiming for, which is a common point for those in a creationism / bible thumper position.
but that can work both ways... if god is omnipotent then he must be able to make a rock he cannot let, which would mean is he is not omnipotent. And the argument from morality is quite amusing, since christians found it morally right and their god given duty to slaughter all the muslims they could find, as well as mayans, incas, aztecs, Aeti, and dozens of other indigenous peoples...
Morality is a standard built upon by a society... an individual contributes to this morality by their actions and reactions, be it acceptance or rejection of those around themselves and their actions or reactions. So saying it is better to argue for god based upon morality is an eloquent way of saying "We cannot argue this in any real way so we will make shit up to try and sound smart and fit our opinion"
And Fact is not Truth? I fail to see the difference...
The word "fact" can also be rendered (using a U.K. English Thesaurus) as "truth", "reality", "actuality" or "verity".
Dec 24, 2012Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)Quote from TwilightRealmWhen we began to believe the world was round instead of flat, the truth about the earth didn’t change, only our belief about the earth changed
You are correct in what you say here. But allow me to expand on what I said earlier.
People once believed the world was flat. The science and knowledge of the time limited them to that fact, and for them, it was an absolute truth, not a mere belief. The real truth was that the Earth was round, it orbits the sun, which in turn orbits the center of the Milky Way Galaxy, etc...
But still for them the Earth was flat. It was only many centuries later that the truth was challenged and people began to learn that the truths which influenced their lives so much needed to be re-evaluated.
Much of what we hold true today, was indeed at some point nothing more than a solid belief in something, if even that.
The Nazi's once held such high beliefs in their Aryan superiority, that it was accepted as truth. Anyone who said otherwise was considered a traitor. This "Truth" was so widely ingrained into the minds of the people, that it resulted in a war that cost 55,000,000 lives to be proven a falsehood.
I guess the entire point I'm trying to make here (and in my previous post) is this: Regardless of our beliefs, whatever it is that we consider to be true, will at some point in the future perhaps be proven a falsehood.
Truth itself does not change. Only that which we perceive as Truth does....
Dec 23, 2012Posted in: General Discussion (non-Diablo)Quote from TwilightRealm
Quote from proletaria
Something is "wrong," if the actor would not prefer that his action be used against himself. Someone is "bad," if they habitually use violence (except in self-defense).
So then "right" and "wrong" are subjective to each person, rather than abiding by some absolute standard. And the only things that makes someone bad is if they are violent (except in self-defense)?
Would you agree that Truth is absolute? Regardless of our beliefs, biases, knowledge - Truth stands as a separate entity which is transcultural (such as 2 + 2 = 4) and unchanging. Would you agree?
Truth is not absolute. Did people not once believe it true that the Earth was the center of the universe? Or that the Sun revolved around the Earth? Or that if you sailed far enough over the oceans, you'd fall off the edge of the Earth?
The point I'm trying to make is that truth is indeed a subjective thing. That which we hold true and undeniable today, may well be proven wrong sometime in the future.
Some more recent examples of so-called "truths" that have been proven absolutely false are the end-of-the-world prophecies, such the millennium doomsday belief that had many people thinking the world would come to an end at midnight on 31 December 1999, or that the end of the Mayan calendar at 2012-12-21 would bring about the Apocalypse.
Jun 26, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Oh for certain!
My own so-called "end game" right now is replaying the entire game, and when I take a break, I read "Diablo III - The Order", and try to find links between the book and the lore within the game. That alone make makes it worth it for me. And then when I'm done for the day, I discuss the story with my 74-year old dad who doesn't play games, and his interest alone keeps me coming back for more.
Marks my words. Give it 40 to 50 years or so, and the whole story, from all authors, starting from Diablo 1 and going all the way through Diablo III and whatever is still to come, will be held with the same regard then as we do today for the epic Tolkien stories, "The Silmarillion", "The Hobbit" and "The Lord Of The Rings".
Jun 22, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from Drez
LOL WELCOME TO REAL LIFE. You always pay for service, why would anyone take their time to craft gems and put them on the AH, without any profit, just for you, so that you can save that same amount of time? Supply - Demand, as long as there are more lazy people than those willing to take their time and craft gems and put them on the AH, crafted gem prices will be higher. If more people decide to do the same, prices will go lower, but if people aren't stupid it will never go below crafting cost+auction house cut.
I'm not expecting prices to go below (or even equal to) crafting costs, but for crying out loud, is it really necessary for players to be demanding prices that are more than twice the normal crafting costs?
I don't always understand economics, but I do understand the the law of supply and demand. But I'd still personally wait for prices to drop to more acceptable levels before considering the AH more efficient than crafting them myself.
Jun 22, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from TorianCC1) You need the receipe to drop. If you dont have it or know someone who has you cant craft it yourself. So people will profit from the fact that they have it and you dont - normal practice with all things to sell/buy in the realworld
The Jeweler can go has far a Radiant Square Topaz when fully trained, and not require any additional recipies. I worry about getting recipies for better gems when the time comes...
Quote from TorianCC2) There is the 15% fee. So the gems in the GAH will always be more expensive than crafting for yourself. Noone wants to loose money by selling gems on the GAH.
3) Paying 400k more is still too much - so you have a point there - but as almost everything is way to expensive in the GAH it would be better to find someone over forum or general chat who will craft things for you, you cant do yourself. Thats the sad thing really - the GAH could be such a nice and easy way to trade, but the prices screw it up big time :-(
Too true! I myself crafted some Rubies for a friend (playing a Barbarian) some time ago because his Jeweler was not trained far enough yet. But [Insert Colorful Expletive Here], I think people are being purposefully idiotic with their prices, because they don't really want the AH, and want to see it fail.
I'd rather list an item for 50,000 or so and be certain that it would sell (sometimes I must list 2 or 3 times before it does) before I list the item for 20,000,000 and KNOW that it would never sell at that price. The highest succesful sale I've made was for around 125,000.
The most I've ever been prepared to pay for an item was 500,000, when I purchased a socketable Azurewrath for my Wizard, and that pushed here DPS up by about 13,000 points....
Jun 22, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from Strategoes
They dont have gems listed on the RMAH yet because commodities aren't allowed as of yet.
You also forgot to take into account the gold sink 15% fee that battlenet charges for a completed AH transaction. So 182,155 gold comes off your stated profit of 444,150 gold. You are also not taking into account that some sellers don't find all their materials. Like, If I wanted to sell high tier gems in bulk I don't find 300 flawless topaz every other day so I'll look on the AH for some at 250-300 gold a pop. Also, tomes are needed which could run from 600-700 gold. Maybe some people don't level up their jeweler and look to the AH for their gems. Well, the players that DID level up their jeweler paid gold to train up to the point where they can craft higher level gems. So they'll charge a fee for crafting that gem for said player.
Even so, it still leaves me with a savings of 377,527 Gold.
And I don't fully recall how much I paid for it (I think around 80,000 or so), but when I hit level 60, Ipurchased a stack of 200 Tome Of Secrets to keep in my stash, because I have a hard enough time surviving in Inferno, let alone looking for TOS drops.
Quote from DeepThought
Anecdotal evidence: I crafted a star amethyst entirely from my own materials and sold it on the AH. After the 15% fee, I made about 35k profit.
Profit, no doubt, but in my opinion not worth it, considering it virtually wiped out my stash of amethysts.
Your mileage may vary. Again, this is based upon one single instance and is certainly not demonstrative of any trend.
In the future I will probably craft my own gems when I can afford it and NOT sell them.
Gems for me are not a problem, as I have an entire tab dedicated to gems of all colours and qualities....
Jun 22, 2012Some might ask why I'm rehashing common knowledge that the Auction House is full of greedy people. I guess I'm also trying to point out to DiabloFans forum members that using the Auction House (more specifically, the GAH) doesn't always work out in your favour.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Here's my reasoning:
I want to change the 7 Perfect Square Topaz that I have socketed into various armour items, and my rings with Radiant Square Topaz.
In order to craft them, I'll need 7x6 Tome Of Secrets and 7x3 Perfect Square Topaz, costing 50,000 each to craft for a total of 560,000 Gold.
Except I have no Perfect Square Topaz to spare in my stash, so I'll have to make them first. So without accounting for those that I've already socketed, I first need to craft 21 Perfect Square Topaz, requiring 7x3 Tome Of Secrets and 7x3 Flawless Square Topaz, costing 30,000 each for a total of 210,000 Gold.
This adds up as follows:
However, if you search the Gold Auction House for 7 Radiant Square Topaz, you get a total purchase price of 1,214,150 (This was the buyout price I saw about 30 minutes before making this post). It is therefore cheaper for me to craft the gems I need instead of going to the AH to buy them. By crafting the gems, I'll be saving 444,150 Gold. It may take a little longer, but it'll most certainly be a cost saving in the long run.
I haven't checked the RMAH gems prices yet, but I'd like to know what people are paying for gems there...
Jun 22, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Adaptation is most definitely key.Quote from ruksak
Quote from AetherMcLoud
Try playing a monk when suddenly your spirit generation is halfed because of the Attackspeed nerf, and 3 of your 4 spirit builders are also completely useless now because they build spirit so slow.
I play monk and you're wrong. You must adapt. Find your own way to build spirit and use it wiser.....I won't tell you, you'll just have to figure it out through your cloud of rage.
AetherMcLoud, I certainly hope you don't take this personally, but maybe you just haven't yet figured out the skill set that fits your play style and strategies. I originally thought I had my character skill set where I wanted it to make her viable, but I was wrong.
As my topic post mentioned, Hathor originally was using "Familiar" instead of "Hydra". But after failing to kill Hell Belial on my own getting killed far too often, and having to ask for help from a friend (thanks, btw, Rhayven), I learned to adapt my playstyle, and Hathor is now perfectly capable of holding her own without dying for much longer than before.
Get yourself some standby support skills, and more importantly: Don't ever stand still in the same place for more than second if you can avoid it...
Jun 22, 2012I seriously do not understand what most people's glitch is about Patch 1.0.3.Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
I am playing a Female Wizard (Hathor), whose damage with "Magic Weapon" skill and "Glass Cannon" passive was at around 41,500DPS, and was concerned that the Increased Attack Speed (IAS) nerf would essentially render her useless, because much of the items she is using have between 15%-18% IAS. I was also concerned that my replaying Act III to farm for gold and items would no longer be viable, because of the increased repair costs.
It appears that my concerns were for nought.
Before 1.0.3, I could farm Act III from start to finish for in the region of 200,000 - 250,000 gold. And I don't mean farming by only breaking barrels and other stuff. I mean actually playing through all quests and killing all monsters, which included dying a couple times by the hands of the champions.
But yesterday, when I played 1.0.3 for the first time, I completed the whole of Act III for a net gold profit of around 350,000, even after having to cope with the significantly increased repair costs after having died several times.
I honestly thought the DPS drop would hurt my playstyle. But it didn't! In fact, thanks to the DPS drop, which is now at around 28000 with "Glass Cannon" passive and "Magic Weapon" skill, I've learned to play smarter by making more use of my skills in different combinations. ("Disintergrate", "Electrocute" primaries, and 1-4 slots "Blizzard", "Hydra", "Magic Weapon" and "Energy Shield", and "Glass Cannon", "Astral Presense" and "Galvanising Ward" passives).
And no, I don't swapout my skills on a whim. The skill set mentioned above is what I use, regardless of which boss or champion pack I'm fighting. I previously used "Familiar" instead of "Hydra", but about 2 weeks ago, I needed a friends help to get past Belial on Hell (which I never could do on my own) and I then realised how effective Hydra can be, and I swapped out "Familiar" in favour of "Hydra". and I've been using that combo ever since.
So I guess what I'm trying to say to those people who are complaing about 1.0.3 is this:
Stop looking at the raw number changes to your character stats and other items and then actually go out an play the game. You may find that the game is better that it's ever been, and is indeed much more fun than ever! I would even go so far as to say that I would have accepted that blizzard NOT have released the game on May 15 and take another month or two to integrate these changes even then.
Diablo III 1.0.3 is most defintely what the game should have been from the start!
May 14, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from SFJake
Blizzard does not meet basic quality standards. The hotkey system is extremely limited and does not include versatile options, 'nor does it include the previous D2 hotkey system in any form, which is blasphemous for anyone used to that.
They just don't want you to switch like that and what you to use THEIR system no matter what you like or are used to, even if they very easily could.
Adapting to change is the key to progress.
You sound like General Motors and Toyota when they scrapped their electric car technologies (EV1 and RAV4) because everyone "was used to" internal combustion engines, and the change to pure electric would be too jarring.
Blizzard has looked at the big picture, and have determined that the previous hotkey system of D2 is old an inefficient, and have changed it in favor of the system we have now in D3. To use my analogy: Blizzard has dumped the internal combustion engines for electric, because it's more efficient.
Seriously, SFJake, if you really want to keep using the D2 hotkey system, then go play D2, and leave D3 to me and all the other people who understand that the changes Blizzard have made are for the better...
May 11, 2012Posted in: Diablo III General DiscussionQuote from Zanmato
Quote from Dzomlija
I'll be 39 in July, so basically if Diablo 3 lasts as long as Diablo 2 did, I'll still be playing it at the ripe old age of 50!
Although I should point out that my dad is 74 (also in July), and while he doesn't play the game itself, he likes the story. In fact, he's more excited for the release than I am!
That's pretty rad! does he read the books then?
Yes, he does, and he loves them! I got him "The Book Of Cain" as an early birthday present.
He was actually disappointed that the "Diablo Wrath" video was only 6 minutes. More like a trailer, really.
May 11, 2012I'll be 39 in July, so basically if Diablo 3 lasts as long as Diablo 2 did, I'll still be playing it at the ripe old age of 50!Posted in: Diablo III General Discussion
Although I should point out that my dad is 74 (also in July), and while he doesn't play the game itself, he likes the story. In fact, he's more excited for the release than I am!
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.