Thread: Jiffy Pop FAQ
View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 2
06-09-2011, 06:02 AM
Please read all my responses with a level, calm voice, it is how I intend them. My intent is not an argumentative one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermbot View Post
Question 2. No seriously, you support homogenization why should your opinion hold any weight with anyone?

Well, I'm going to avoid the rant about people misusing the word opinion and just say, don't worry about my opinion, look at my reasons, they're sound, weigh them against the negative effects you would feel as a player and come to your own conclusion.
While I hate to point it out, it's really just an assertion that your reasons are sound. From the reactions and counter-arguments your other threads have drawn out, I think you should be at least be willing to consider that your reasons are not as sound as you may think.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermbot View Post
Question 8. Won't this just discourage Cryptic from working on new Klingon content?

Oh thank god, finally a question that's not about homogenization. No, I believe with the end game populations closer to even Cryptic will in fact be encouraged to work on new Klingon content.
You think homogenization would lead to a larger KDF population. This is an assertion you have made multiple times, but never explained. To put it in question form: Why would a Fed player who desires ~KDF asset~ roll a KDF character if they already have access to ~KDF asset~ with their Fed(s)?

Basically:


Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermbot View Post
Question 10. Why do you think this will increase Klingon population numbers
The only answer you (kind of) supply is:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jermbot View Post
..apparently the Klingons have just a little more solo content to do at end game.
I do not understand, please explain how giving KDF assets to the Federation will result in more KDF characters rather than Fed characters with KDF assets.

I've specifically avoided the questions I consider specious, as they neither represent my reasoning, nor my objections to your proposal(s).

I thank you for your time, and hope you understand that a reasonable, level-headed debate between you and I is likely to do far more good than all the flaming/arguing we might otherwise engage in.