But in any game you can afford to do almost nothing, and gain almost nothing.
Does not mean that you can do anything without thinking about it.
And you are wrong : several activities, that are not documented at all, require to think about your fit, your activity.
If you had actually read my post you would have noticed the phrases “to an extent” and “for the most part”; neither of these phrases indicates that I mean all PvE activities require minimal effort and intelligence or are documented.
Those term bear no intrinsic meaning. Since you don’t understand my post, let me rephrase :
I’ve known of activities, not documented, that I would never have heard of if not for the person whom I talked to. That means that there exist at least those activities, that many people don’t know about.
Therefore you have no idea about what actually requires intelligence to perform. You know of things that don’t require intelligence, but that does not talk about what you don’t know.
You are in the typical fallacy “I can prove that something does not exist by my experience”.
Those terms are idioms commonly accepted to mean certain things.
To an extend means: Somewhat; partly; in a limited way or to a limited degree.
For the most part means: Mostly; in general.
In short neither represents the all.
I’ve known of activities, not documented, that I would never have heard of if not for the person whom I talked to. That means that there exist at least those activities, that many people don’t know about.
I partake of some PvE activities that are not the norm, some have related documentation, some do not.
Eve is a sandbox, such occurrences are almost guaranteed to happen when people are free to do pretty much as they please with what they have been given.
Therefore you have no idea about what actually requires intelligence to perform. You know of things that don’t require intelligence, but that does not talk about what you don’t know.
I also know of things that do require intelligence to perform. I never stated that I know of all activities, nor did I judge upon them; this is where those idioms/phrases, to an extent and for the most part, come into play.
You are in the typical fallacy “I can prove that something does not exist by my experience”.
No, I am not; you however have tried to misrepresent what I said by stating that commonly used idioms, which in this case are phrases that completely refute your version of what I said, have no intrinsic value and inferring indirectly that they don’t mean what they actually mean; not that I’m sure the term intrinsic value can actually be applied in that way.
In short, while stating that you believe I have presented a logical fallacy, you’ve constructed the very definition of a strawman argument, which in itself is a logical fallacy.
Fallception indeed.
And still they don’t bear intrinsic meaning. There is no formal definition to where they apply or not ; meaning using them is the same as not using them. One person will accept that “most” will apply in a case, and another person will not accept this case. Therefore, for the sake of communication, those terms are useless : they can only be used with people that already understand and agree with you.
“for the most part” implies you know which part does, so that you know the total.
This I did not. You are doing a strawman.
Also, you are arrogant in your representation of the players.
Intrinsic or not, they do have a well defined and commonly accepted meaning, and I did not use them incorrectly.
One person will accept that “most” will apply in a case, and another person will not accept this case.
This is the nature of discussion.
Therefore, for the sake of communication, those terms are useless : they can only be used with people that already understand and agree with you.
Wat™?
"for the most part” implies you know which part does, so that you know the total.
It implies that I know that some parts do, and that some do not; it doesn’t imply that I know about all the other parts of the whole.
You are doing a strawman.
Did I misrepresent your post?
Or did you in fact dispute the meaning of the idioms I used in order to present my post as saying something it did not?
Which I did not claim the opposite.
No this is not.
You need common terms to discuss. That’s what language is for. You can’t discuss on something unless you agree on the terms.
Yes it does. You need to know at least the size of the other parts.
No I did not.
I literally wrote
That was my first point : many activities that don’t require intelligence, actually are worth much more when people do use intelligence.
An example would be anomalies farming, or ded farming in HS (only to take those).
AFAIK there is no correct guide for efficient farming of those. People do them without a thought, without intelligence, and end up with bad reward. People who put intelligence behind their activity can do a lot more.
My second point was explained here :
This is called life, it applies to every aspect of it including games. I haven’t disputed this.
Many PvE activities don’t require effort or intelligence to perform, but the application of both makes them more rewarding, I haven’t said otherwise.
Read this again.
None of this is false, nor does it refute that the application of effort and intelligence can improve game play, it simply states that you can do PvE without doing so, to an extent as in to a limited degree. It also states that almost every PvE activity is documented, almost as in not all of them.
Indeed, and the idioms I used are part of the English language.
You can’t discuss on something unless you agree on the terms.
I used common terms, as in commonly used in everyday English, the language that we’re both using. Bear in mind that I live in the UK, your experience of everyday English may vary.
I know that English isn’t your native language, although your written English is very good you appear to have a problem with idioms and colloquialisms so I’m going to leave it at this.
Well, many PVE activities actually require intelligence to be even worth considering.
Preparation, knowledge, logistics are required to make many activities worth.
I met people who did anoms in NS and barely made a profit. And left the game because it was boring and not worth it.
And still, you fail to realize that some terms you use don’t bear an intrinsic value. If you don’t explicit what you mean by “most”, typically with sourced numbers, then your sentence “most are(…)” is semantically the same as “all are(…)”.
Those terms you used are quantifiers but they do not bear intrinsic value of quantity.
You’re right though, that using english mostly for academic research, my experience may vary a lot to yours. But in academic works, every time you use such a quantifier, you need to explicit the value you used somewhere otherwise your article is ambiguous and therefore of no value.
The Eve forums are not academia, if you’re applying the standards of academia, it’s no wonder that you come across as pedantic. The use of those standards is not appropriate outside of the academic research world.
if this game is made for pvp why does it have a lot of pve gameplay then? one doesn’t join the game to conquer the entire universe and kill every single person in it and declare their monarchy do they?
I stated what I want clearly multiple times and it’s not what you understood from the multiple times I wrote about what I wanted, so go read properly perhaps?
k boomers
Pve is another form of resource gathering. Like mining but with different game play and different resources. But ultimately these resources are designed to enable or to be used to pvp.
that I already know, but people here blame me for PvE’ing as if it’s something banned
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.