Why can’t you just enjoy both or at least mildly prefer one over the other rather than be so polarized?
That's the world we live in today. Everything is polarized. Coke/Pepsi, Yankees/Red Sox, Habs/Bruins, Republicans/Democrats ...
I think it speaks more to a certain generation needed instant gratification, rather than long competition. I am a professional gambler and poker player, so I am used to the games taking days.
Why can’t you just enjoy both or at least mildly prefer one over the other rather than be so polarized?
That's the world we live in today. Everything is polarized. Coke/Pepsi, Yankees/Red Sox, Habs/Bruins, Republicans/Democrats ...
I think it speaks more to a certain generation needed instant gratification, rather than long competition. I am a professional gambler and poker player, so I am used to the games taking days.
"A certain generation?" I thought all us Trekkies were older than dirt?
Why can’t you just enjoy both or at least mildly prefer one over the other rather than be so polarized?
That's the world we live in today. Everything is polarized. Coke/Pepsi, Yankees/Red Sox, Habs/Bruins, Republicans/Democrats ...
I think it speaks more to a certain generation needed instant gratification, rather than long competition. I am a professional gambler and poker player, so I am used to the games taking days.
"A certain generation?" I thought all us Trekkies were older than dirt?
That’s us TOS Trekkies who remember strings on their Klingon Battlecruisers... he may be referring to the “Next Generation” or even, heaven forbid. The Disco Generation... 😜
I don’t get it with the Galaxy>Faction event people - especially as it pertains to threshold rewards. Unless you don’t believe in sending more than the bare minimum of shuttles to hit the daily mission requirement, you will spend less additional time time to reach the threshold in a Faction event than you will in a Galaxy event. And if you’re trying to get to the top 1000, you are probably not spending any more time in a Faction event but it may be stretched out over a longer period...you’re still dumping a lot of resources (be it your free time, chrons, dilithium, etc.) into the event either way.
I can only speak for myself here but my dislike of faction mainly boils down to a few things... The first being that I have to set alarms to go off in the middle of the night if I want to rank. Sending overnights just won't cut it. Even if all my overnights succeed, which rarely happens, I'm still going to slip 2-300 places typically. I might, MIGHT, be able to get away with it once and still be able to rank, but I'm still looking at 3 nights of interrupted sleep. And dude, I like my sleep. I work a physical job and I really need it.
Second, if I want to go see a movie or something and can't re-launch my shuttles as soon as they come in, guess what? I just lost another 100 places. If I want to spend some time with my family at my mom's lake house where cell reception is spotty, that's gonna cost me a couple hundred places too.
Also, when you factor in DBNG, there's ALWAYS a possibility that even if you do everything right for the first 3 days, you can suddenly suffer 8 90%+ losses in a row, and your bird is cooked. You've wasted your whole weekend to walk away with a 4/4 and a 3/4 that won't be added to the portal for 6 months. And that 's happened to me more than once. The rewards just don't justify the effort. Until DB actually reworks the rewards for faction events, you're never going to convince me it's worth the hassle. Frankly, I'm not sure that even a 2/5 would be worth that amount of hassle, much less a 1/5.
As a counter to your argument, I typically spend almost as much time doing my quick start as I spent on this week's entire event. And if you want to rank, you better be ready to go when the countdown hits 0, which inconveniently lands right smack dab in the middle of my work day, like most of us on EST.
Sure, I could spend stupid amounts of money to guarantee I rank but why? If I was willing or able to drop buckets of cash, why not just buy the cards outright and skip the event altogether?
With galaxy, I KNOW, with absolute certainty, I can get the gold if I want it. With faction, it's never a certainty. I can USUALLY rank if I want to, but upsets definitely do happen, and with the time/effort/hassle involved, those upsets REALLY sting.
wow....~inappropriate comment snipped...next time some one says they have it tough...im gonna let them read this post so they can see what REAL HELL on earth is....
I don’t get it with the Galaxy>Faction event people - especially as it pertains to threshold rewards. Unless you don’t believe in sending more than the bare minimum of shuttles to hit the daily mission requirement, you will spend less additional time time to reach the threshold in a Faction event than you will in a Galaxy event. And if you’re trying to get to the top 1000, you are probably not spending any more time in a Faction event but it may be stretched out over a longer period...you’re still dumping a lot of resources (be it your free time, chrons, dilithium, etc.) into the event either way.
I can only speak for myself here but my dislike of faction mainly boils down to a few things... The first being that I have to set alarms to go off in the middle of the night if I want to rank. Sending overnights just won't cut it. Even if all my overnights succeed, which rarely happens, I'm still going to slip 2-300 places typically. I might, MIGHT, be able to get away with it once and still be able to rank, but I'm still looking at 3 nights of interrupted sleep. And dude, I like my sleep. I work a physical job and I really need it.
Second, if I want to go see a movie or something and can't re-launch my shuttles as soon as they come in, guess what? I just lost another 100 places. If I want to spend some time with my family at my mom's lake house where cell reception is spotty, that's gonna cost me a couple hundred places too.
Also, when you factor in DBNG, there's ALWAYS a possibility that even if you do everything right for the first 3 days, you can suddenly suffer 8 90%+ losses in a row, and your bird is cooked. You've wasted your whole weekend to walk away with a 4/4 and a 3/4 that won't be added to the portal for 6 months. And that 's happened to me more than once. The rewards just don't justify the effort. Until DB actually reworks the rewards for faction events, you're never going to convince me it's worth the hassle. Frankly, I'm not sure that even a 2/5 would be worth that amount of hassle, much less a 1/5.
As a counter to your argument, I typically spend almost as much time doing my quick start as I spent on this week's entire event. And if you want to rank, you better be ready to go when the countdown hits 0, which inconveniently lands right smack dab in the middle of my work day, like most of us on EST.
Sure, I could spend stupid amounts of money to guarantee I rank but why? If I was willing or able to drop buckets of cash, why not just buy the cards outright and skip the event altogether?
With galaxy, I KNOW, with absolute certainty, I can get the gold if I want it. With faction, it's never a certainty. I can USUALLY rank if I want to, but upsets definitely do happen, and with the time/effort/hassle involved, those upsets REALLY sting.
wow....~inappropriate comment snipped...next time some one says they have it tough...im gonna let them read this post so they can see what REAL HELL on earth is....
I missed your comment before it got snipped. I'll just assume it was a compliment. So... thanks.
Threshold & Out landed me at #10750 for this event, a far cry from a top 1000 ranking.
14654 for me. My point though was that it took me 38 minutes to rack up 130k vp. And after you get through all the low vp builds you accumulate vp even faster than that. I don't know how many vp player 1000 had but maybe someone close to that can chime in?
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
I think there have always been both crazed fanatics and civil debaters, but it does seem like the fanatics have become more fanatical, and the people who can disagree and still maintain a level of civility are disappearing. I cannot stand to watch two sides foam at the mouth when confronting each other, but, in the past, I have found it fascinating to listen to someone with whom I vehemently disagree but yet is exceedingly cool, civilized, and courteous in their arguments.
I remember many years ago catching a bit of G. Gordon Liddy's radio show — now there is a man whose convictions can safely be called "polarizing" — and yet I was captivated by his debating style... especially with one caller who had completely opposing views. Liddy did not insult nor demean the man, but cogently laid out his points, and by the end of the conversation the caller was not necessarily agreeing with Liddy, but did concede that he understood where Liddy was coming from (a substantial shift from where he was just moments earlier, at the beginning of their conversation).
Yelling, insulting, and even physically assaulting someone because they don't believe as you do or because you fear what they represent/who they are, I suppose can fill some unconscious need to regain one's sense of control or power... but it does nothing to bring the two sides closer together — indeed, it only serves to push them even further apart.
Could you please continue the petty bickering? I find it most intriguing. ~ Data, ST:TNG "Haven"
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
No apologies necessary. You helped me out when I first joined the forum before I could even post. I invite you to "interrupt" my threads whenever you like. Besides, you always have insightful comments that I find... fascinating.
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
I think there have always been both crazed fanatics and civil debaters, but it does seem like the fanatics have become more fanatical, and the people who can disagree and still maintain a level of civility are disappearing. I cannot stand to watch two sides foam at the mouth when confronting each other, but, in the past, I have found it fascinating to listen to someone with whom I vehemently disagree but yet is exceedingly cool, civilized, and courteous in their arguments.
I remember many years ago catching a bit of G. Gordon Liddy's radio show — now there is a man whose convictions can safely be called "polarizing" — and yet I was captivated by his debating style... especially with one caller who had completely opposing views. Liddy did not insult nor demean the man, but cogently laid out his points, and by the end of the conversation the caller was not necessarily agreeing with Liddy, but did concede that he understood where Liddy was coming from (a substantial shift from where he was just moments earlier, at the beginning of their conversation).
Yelling, insulting, and even physically assaulting someone because they don't believe as you do or because you fear what they represent/who they are, I suppose can fill some unconscious need to regain one's sense of control or power... but it does nothing to bring the two sides closer together — indeed, it only serves to push them even further apart.
As much as I agree with the above I have one thing that I feel is missing.... The polarization has nothing to do with the way people disagree (civilized or uncivilized), but with the extremes of how their views differ. And we have more and more moved to a society where you are either against or in favor of something... it is black and white more and more and I believe that one of the contributing factors is the crazy rivalries between sports teams and how "angry" people will get at a supporter from a different team. Now of course you do not have to agree with my idea of why but I do think that more and more people are pushing each other and themselves into extreme views. I think this is a shame as it hinders compromise and working together on solutions to problems that need everyone instead of a few.
I myself am someone that dislikes "extreme" views left or right or on any sports team or inStar Trek. There are definitely movies that or shows that I like more or less but I don't think someone else is less of a Trek fan if they like others shows/movies than me.
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
I think there have always been both crazed fanatics and civil debaters, but it does seem like the fanatics have become more fanatical, and the people who can disagree and still maintain a level of civility are disappearing. I cannot stand to watch two sides foam at the mouth when confronting each other, but, in the past, I have found it fascinating to listen to someone with whom I vehemently disagree but yet is exceedingly cool, civilized, and courteous in their arguments.
I remember many years ago catching a bit of G. Gordon Liddy's radio show — now there is a man whose convictions can safely be called "polarizing" — and yet I was captivated by his debating style... especially with one caller who had completely opposing views. Liddy did not insult nor demean the man, but cogently laid out his points, and by the end of the conversation the caller was not necessarily agreeing with Liddy, but did concede that he understood where Liddy was coming from (a substantial shift from where he was just moments earlier, at the beginning of their conversation).
Yelling, insulting, and even physically assaulting someone because they don't believe as you do or because you fear what they represent/who they are, I suppose can fill some unconscious need to regain one's sense of control or power... but it does nothing to bring the two sides closer together — indeed, it only serves to push them even further apart.
I'm just thankful we all have different taste.
It definitely makes for a more interesting world. But as it pertains to this thread, I was just making the case that galaxy events definitely don't take as long as some people on the forums would seem to believe. I still think ~2 hours is not even remotely out of the realm of possibility to rank. Certainly less than 3 hours total. I usually do it all in one sitting and I don't think it's ever taken me 3 hours to rank, though admittedly, I don't make a habit of timing myself (until now at least.)
Does it take some planning? Yes. Does it take some chrons? Yes. Does it take some knowledge about which missions have the best drops for different items? Again, yes. Do I care if some people prefer faction events over galaxy events? Absolutely not. Why would I? That's a factor that works to my benefit. I guess I feel like there's more strategy involved in galaxy events, which I prefer, and a whole lot less rng than faction events to ruin all my efforts spent over the course of a weekend at the very last minute. Would I want all galaxy, all the time? Definitely not. But if there's an awesome legendary char I need to rank for, I definitely prefer the galaxy format.
Red Sox and Yankees have had a rivalry for over a hundred years. The Denocratic and Republican Parties have had a rivalry even longer. So weird for someone to blame the current generation for rivalries that predated their births by decades if not much longer.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
I think there have always been both crazed fanatics and civil debaters, but it does seem like the fanatics have become more fanatical, and the people who can disagree and still maintain a level of civility are disappearing. I cannot stand to watch two sides foam at the mouth when confronting each other, but, in the past, I have found it fascinating to listen to someone with whom I vehemently disagree but yet is exceedingly cool, civilized, and courteous in their arguments.
I remember many years ago catching a bit of G. Gordon Liddy's radio show — now there is a man whose convictions can safely be called "polarizing" — and yet I was captivated by his debating style... especially with one caller who had completely opposing views. Liddy did not insult nor demean the man, but cogently laid out his points, and by the end of the conversation the caller was not necessarily agreeing with Liddy, but did concede that he understood where Liddy was coming from (a substantial shift from where he was just moments earlier, at the beginning of their conversation).
Yelling, insulting, and even physically assaulting someone because they don't believe as you do or because you fear what they represent/who they are, I suppose can fill some unconscious need to regain one's sense of control or power... but it does nothing to bring the two sides closer together — indeed, it only serves to push them even further apart.
As much as I agree with the above I have one thing that I feel is missing.... The polarization has nothing to do with the way people disagree (civilized or uncivilized), but with the extremes of how their views differ. And we have more and more moved to a society where you are either against or in favor of something... it is black and white more and more and I believe that one of the contributing factors is the crazy rivalries between sports teams and how "angry" people will get at a supporter from a different team. Now of course you do not have to agree with my idea of why but I do think that more and more people are pushing each other and themselves into extreme views. I think this is a shame as it hinders compromise and working together on solutions to problems that need everyone instead of a few.
I myself am someone that dislikes "extreme" views left or right or on any sports team or inStar Trek. There are definitely movies that or shows that I like more or less but I don't think someone else is less of a Trek fan if they like others shows/movies than me.
I'm just thankful we all have different taste.
Thing is, in the sports side of things the only views out there are my Team is better. It's being expressed in an more intense and literally fanatical manner.
There's no new view or difference. In my baseball experience, the Dodgers and the Giants have a rivalry dating back to when they were both in New York. The beatings of Giants fans started in more recent memory.
How does the view differ that the Dodgers are better than the Giants or vice versa from then to now other than the extreme dedication and expression of it?
Comments
I think it speaks more to a certain generation needed instant gratification, rather than long competition. I am a professional gambler and poker player, so I am used to the games taking days.
"A certain generation?" I thought all us Trekkies were older than dirt?
That’s us TOS Trekkies who remember strings on their Klingon Battlecruisers... he may be referring to the “Next Generation” or even, heaven forbid. The Disco Generation... 😜
wow....~inappropriate comment snipped...next time some one says they have it tough...im gonna let them read this post so they can see what REAL HELL on earth is....
I missed your comment before it got snipped. I'll just assume it was a compliment. So... thanks.
14654 for me. My point though was that it took me 38 minutes to rack up 130k vp. And after you get through all the low vp builds you accumulate vp even faster than that. I don't know how many vp player 1000 had but maybe someone close to that can chime in?
I can tell you that rank 1500 was about 300k VP...
That’s a pretty good description. And it still irks me to this day. And every day that I will play this game.
The current generation is riding a wave of even more disparate nastiness in their rivalries.
Tell me, in the early days of the Yankees Dodgers rivalries, how many people were critically injured for wearing the opposing teams jersies?
And in the last 10 years, how many folks wearing opposing team jerseys have been assaulted for wearing SF Giants or other rivals jerseys in or near the LA Stadium?
Rivalries have always existed, but the civility between them that existed between most, including Democrat and Republicans has disappeared and dissipated. On that vein, Tip O'Neil and Ronald Reagan showed how folks who really don't like each others views can be civil and even compromise. That civility is becoming rarer and rarer.
With apologies to the OP, I realize this thread has gotten way off topic, but it's an interesting topic, so I was swayed to dive in to the fray myself.
I think there have always been both crazed fanatics and civil debaters, but it does seem like the fanatics have become more fanatical, and the people who can disagree and still maintain a level of civility are disappearing. I cannot stand to watch two sides foam at the mouth when confronting each other, but, in the past, I have found it fascinating to listen to someone with whom I vehemently disagree but yet is exceedingly cool, civilized, and courteous in their arguments.
I remember many years ago catching a bit of G. Gordon Liddy's radio show — now there is a man whose convictions can safely be called "polarizing" — and yet I was captivated by his debating style... especially with one caller who had completely opposing views. Liddy did not insult nor demean the man, but cogently laid out his points, and by the end of the conversation the caller was not necessarily agreeing with Liddy, but did concede that he understood where Liddy was coming from (a substantial shift from where he was just moments earlier, at the beginning of their conversation).
Yelling, insulting, and even physically assaulting someone because they don't believe as you do or because you fear what they represent/who they are, I suppose can fill some unconscious need to regain one's sense of control or power... but it does nothing to bring the two sides closer together — indeed, it only serves to push them even further apart.
Could you please continue the petty bickering? I find it most intriguing.
~ Data, ST:TNG "Haven"
No apologies necessary. You helped me out when I first joined the forum before I could even post. I invite you to "interrupt" my threads whenever you like. Besides, you always have insightful comments that I find... fascinating.
As much as I agree with the above I have one thing that I feel is missing.... The polarization has nothing to do with the way people disagree (civilized or uncivilized), but with the extremes of how their views differ. And we have more and more moved to a society where you are either against or in favor of something... it is black and white more and more and I believe that one of the contributing factors is the crazy rivalries between sports teams and how "angry" people will get at a supporter from a different team. Now of course you do not have to agree with my idea of why but I do think that more and more people are pushing each other and themselves into extreme views. I think this is a shame as it hinders compromise and working together on solutions to problems that need everyone instead of a few.
I myself am someone that dislikes "extreme" views left or right or on any sports team or inStar Trek. There are definitely movies that or shows that I like more or less but I don't think someone else is less of a Trek fan if they like others shows/movies than me.
I'm just thankful we all have different taste.
It definitely makes for a more interesting world. But as it pertains to this thread, I was just making the case that galaxy events definitely don't take as long as some people on the forums would seem to believe. I still think ~2 hours is not even remotely out of the realm of possibility to rank. Certainly less than 3 hours total. I usually do it all in one sitting and I don't think it's ever taken me 3 hours to rank, though admittedly, I don't make a habit of timing myself (until now at least.)
Does it take some planning? Yes. Does it take some chrons? Yes. Does it take some knowledge about which missions have the best drops for different items? Again, yes. Do I care if some people prefer faction events over galaxy events? Absolutely not. Why would I? That's a factor that works to my benefit. I guess I feel like there's more strategy involved in galaxy events, which I prefer, and a whole lot less rng than faction events to ruin all my efforts spent over the course of a weekend at the very last minute. Would I want all galaxy, all the time? Definitely not. But if there's an awesome legendary char I need to rank for, I definitely prefer the galaxy format.
Thing is, in the sports side of things the only views out there are my Team is better. It's being expressed in an more intense and literally fanatical manner.
There's no new view or difference. In my baseball experience, the Dodgers and the Giants have a rivalry dating back to when they were both in New York. The beatings of Giants fans started in more recent memory.
How does the view differ that the Dodgers are better than the Giants or vice versa from then to now other than the extreme dedication and expression of it?