I don't understand people sometimes...
Warning: Kinda related to WoW, but a lot more about how people work.
It appears that I'm annoying people in ALA. A recent post in the "Melee/Hunter DPS" forum basically amounted to an interpretation that two of the changes in the upcoming 2.0.1 patch would kill the value of +weapon skill stat on items. I will openly admit that I really don't know the tiny ins and outs of how weapon skill works or really how much of meleeing works beyond the basic concepts. I'm a mage. If I'm using my wand/dagger/sword/staff, instead of one of my spells, something's really really wrong.
So anyway, I asked a few questions with my meager understanding of how +weapon skill works now, and eventually one of the replies by Dolar states "They mentioned the crit, but it was a nerf as well. now you only gain the extra crit on per weapon skill against monsters above their level. That means instead of added a base amount of crit, it adds crit based on the mobs level. Which is an overall nerf to all aspects. (unless your fighting level 1 mobs then your gonna crit like crazy)".
To this I replied with "Is that tested and confirmed, or is what you're saying an interpretation?" This is a very important distinction to me, because all I'm seeing is people crying "Oh noes! We've been nerfed!" without any numbers to back it up. The reply I receive from Dolar said a few things, including "Do you like trying to make me prove everything i post or something?" At that point I should have stopped replying. A part of me said I should. Dolar wasn't saying "Does everything need to be proven to you?" No, he used "i", which meant he was taking it personally.
But I've never been well known for listening to my common sense, so I replied (and probably in not the most courteous way I could have... >.>):
"You are not answering the question, Dolar. My question was has anyone tested it? Nothing more.
And to reply to your post, yes I have read it. While I realize what you think, here's another scenario: +weapon skill over your level cap still gives the +0.1% to crit (a possibility, considering that weapon skill is also being change to rating), while when fighting mobs with levels above yours, you gain the listed above crit rating.
My point is, you are reading the notes, seeing what it says, and it appears, jumping to conclusions without tests. Now, if I'm wrong, and someone in beta has tested these things conclusively, then I'll go by those tests and shut up. But unless we have hard numbers from Blizzard, we have to test it to make sure."
This netted me a reply from Ely which included this little gem: "...if you're so hell bent on needing to have information from someone you don't know rather than have people you do know interpret the data." That's when it struck me. It wasn't that I wanted tested information, from one source or another. It was that I wasn't "trusting" the people I know to understand this.
So why shouldn't I trust them? Are they stupid? Are they not experts in the fields of attacking with weapons? No, they are both, but even the smartest people can be wrong. Figuring out game mechanics are the science of a video game. They are the rules that govern the way the game works. What Dolar and Ely were asking me to do is listen to an appeal to authority which means there is the possibility of it being a flawed interpretation.
(Here's where the part where I don't understand people sometimes...) How can people be fine with just accepting what someone is interpreting, without testing it? Recently, I tested something in the beta which, assuming I'm correct, almost completely invalidates our current understanding (which I might add has been tested) of spell crits. If something that's been tested can be faulty, you really expect me to believe the untested interpretation of someone?
Anyway, I'm not going to reply to that thread again. I don't think I can get the to understand my want for stuff to be tested is not personal, I don't think people like Dolar are stupid. I just want something more than someone's interpretation.
ADDENDUM: Okay, I guess I really just mean someone's interpretation... even if you follow other people's tests, unless you do it yourself, it's really just listening to an appeal of authority. And this is within reason... obviously you're going to listen to your dentist when he tells you to brush your teeth... not brushing them to test out whether your teeth will fall out seems pretty stupid... but at least finding the tested effects of +weapon skill is better than even the smartest's person untested interpretation.
It appears that I'm annoying people in ALA. A recent post in the "Melee/Hunter DPS" forum basically amounted to an interpretation that two of the changes in the upcoming 2.0.1 patch would kill the value of +weapon skill stat on items. I will openly admit that I really don't know the tiny ins and outs of how weapon skill works or really how much of meleeing works beyond the basic concepts. I'm a mage. If I'm using my wand/dagger/sword/staff, instead of one of my spells, something's really really wrong.
So anyway, I asked a few questions with my meager understanding of how +weapon skill works now, and eventually one of the replies by Dolar states "They mentioned the crit, but it was a nerf as well. now you only gain the extra crit on per weapon skill against monsters above their level. That means instead of added a base amount of crit, it adds crit based on the mobs level. Which is an overall nerf to all aspects. (unless your fighting level 1 mobs then your gonna crit like crazy)".
To this I replied with "Is that tested and confirmed, or is what you're saying an interpretation?" This is a very important distinction to me, because all I'm seeing is people crying "Oh noes! We've been nerfed!" without any numbers to back it up. The reply I receive from Dolar said a few things, including "Do you like trying to make me prove everything i post or something?" At that point I should have stopped replying. A part of me said I should. Dolar wasn't saying "Does everything need to be proven to you?" No, he used "i", which meant he was taking it personally.
But I've never been well known for listening to my common sense, so I replied (and probably in not the most courteous way I could have... >.>):
"You are not answering the question, Dolar. My question was has anyone tested it? Nothing more.
And to reply to your post, yes I have read it. While I realize what you think, here's another scenario: +weapon skill over your level cap still gives the +0.1% to crit (a possibility, considering that weapon skill is also being change to rating), while when fighting mobs with levels above yours, you gain the listed above crit rating.
My point is, you are reading the notes, seeing what it says, and it appears, jumping to conclusions without tests. Now, if I'm wrong, and someone in beta has tested these things conclusively, then I'll go by those tests and shut up. But unless we have hard numbers from Blizzard, we have to test it to make sure."
This netted me a reply from Ely which included this little gem: "...if you're so hell bent on needing to have information from someone you don't know rather than have people you do know interpret the data." That's when it struck me. It wasn't that I wanted tested information, from one source or another. It was that I wasn't "trusting" the people I know to understand this.
So why shouldn't I trust them? Are they stupid? Are they not experts in the fields of attacking with weapons? No, they are both, but even the smartest people can be wrong. Figuring out game mechanics are the science of a video game. They are the rules that govern the way the game works. What Dolar and Ely were asking me to do is listen to an appeal to authority which means there is the possibility of it being a flawed interpretation.
(Here's where the part where I don't understand people sometimes...) How can people be fine with just accepting what someone is interpreting, without testing it? Recently, I tested something in the beta which, assuming I'm correct, almost completely invalidates our current understanding (which I might add has been tested) of spell crits. If something that's been tested can be faulty, you really expect me to believe the untested interpretation of someone?
Anyway, I'm not going to reply to that thread again. I don't think I can get the to understand my want for stuff to be tested is not personal, I don't think people like Dolar are stupid. I just want something more than someone's interpretation.
ADDENDUM: Okay, I guess I really just mean someone's interpretation... even if you follow other people's tests, unless you do it yourself, it's really just listening to an appeal of authority. And this is within reason... obviously you're going to listen to your dentist when he tells you to brush your teeth... not brushing them to test out whether your teeth will fall out seems pretty stupid... but at least finding the tested effects of +weapon skill is better than even the smartest's person untested interpretation.