So now the forum moderator tells us saying we think Gutier's writing is bad is an insult. Exactly what i thought, when your arguments make no sense, just straight make up other completely unrelated ones so you can shift the discussion away, like that one time with that famous "but a ninja does exactly the same thing than a Oniwaban"
I do not agree with everything Psychoticstorm writes, but he maintains a much higher level of professionalism than most of his criticizers in this thread. Overall this topic has remained somewhat civilized, but some posters have veered dangerously close to 'frothing internet warrior' territory. I have no authority on this forum, but I too would like to ask for cooler heads. I have noticed that some forum members (On both sides of the disagreement) have no interest in engaging in any sort of discussion, but are convinced their view is the correct one, and wish to shout at anyone who dares to disagree. My personal experience: I had a vanilla Yu Jing force, half JSA, half Red Veil Yu Jing. I now have two different factions too small to stand on their own. Despite my personal loss, I am positive on the split. It feels right to me, and opens up possibilities in the design space. I look forward to where this will go. I have to decide if I want to pursue JSA or Yu Jing or both. I have to admit, it may be childish, but the extreme, and not wholly warranted vitriol on the Yu Jing Section influences me to more likely expand into the more positive JSA community. I don't want to dig too deep into the Uprising fluff, not having the book myself. Reading between the lines of what has been said on the forums, there seems to be some legitimate criticism of the story line. However it also seems there is legitimate praise for what has been written. It appears to me that some posters are only seeing what they want to see, and interpreting the writing how they want, sometimes with scant or no real information.
Discussing the moderators behavior or whether you accept somebody else's arguments or not sounds more and more off topic to me. Maybe start another thread so we can talk about Yu Jing again? Though I think this is an endless discussion. Everyone has already settled on his/her opinion, might as well let it go. I just hope that when the campaign starts there will be commanders who play the faction because they have fun with it. Some time ago ppl were complaining that we wont stand a chance because of lower numbers. In flamestrike I was playing Tohaa and playing the underdog role was exciting. If you aim to win, this might not be for you I'm afraid Gesendet von meinem SM-J500FN mit Tapatalk
@Antares CB's summary of the last campaign wasn't all that fair on Yu Jing. Uprising is, unfortunately, not the only reason to be negative about the next campaign for YJ players.
@Mahramori I can't disagree on that. Still I think the behavior of the playerbase adds much to how a faction is viewed from outside. Look at Haqqislam. They always seemed super relaxed to me about anything happening in the past campaigns. Positive energy, I summon thee! ...it's worth the try at least Gesendet von meinem SM-J500FN mit Tapatalk
Has anything even approaching this level of event happened to Haqqislam? Edit: Point being that it's super easy to be relaxed when nothing bad happens to your faction.
Oh, wow. Gutier's writing is emphatically not good. This is not personal opinion: I'm talking about spelling and grammar mistakes that, quite frankly, are a little bit appalling. AGAIN: I do not define the laws of Spanish language. It is not something that is up for debate. I think he has good ideas, I like Infinity's background, even with its rampant sexism and the C.S.Goto syndrome it sometimes has, but I have come to consider those things as, if not unavoidable, at least common tropes that inexperienced writers use to lure the reader in. A little bit like junk food (CLARIFICATION: those things, and not the entirety of Infinity's background, are like junk food). Infinity's background has the potential for very good things, interesting characters, complex politics, and exciting combat stories. Sometimes, they get it right. Sometimes they don't. But the actual writing, you know, the one-word-then-another-word is sub-par. It has always been. Perhaps in the English version this is not so obvious, because I assume translators will have to "mop up" before they do the actual translating (I worked as a translator for a time and I had to do this often). I wouldn't go as far as saying that it is "trash": it is far from that. It shows some promising ideas, at the very least. But it certainly shows sloppiness on the part of CB to publish these books without proofreading them, something they pretty obviously don't do, at least in the Spanish version. I think I am being polite, and I would very much like it to not have this post twisted by a moderator into some situation in which I go into CB's headquartes, set the place on fire and laugh manically, thank you very much.
For what it's worth, I didn't experience the faction as negative prior to the BOW campaigns, particularly the latest one. This seems to be something pushed on this section of the community by treatment by CB and other players (though, a strong contributing factor is probably how excessive some Yu Jingers role played the superior arrogant angle which landed the faction in diplomatic shithole during the campaigns and thus affected the pile-on) I.e. I'm basically saying the negativity is kind of a justified resentment
@silvertongue I always assumed the translator was just bad. The more you know. In order to read something in another language and have it be good, you need a good writer and a good translator. I assumed it was a failure of the latter... now I know it is the former. Unfortunately I think founder syndrome will prevent the issue from being resolved.
I'm trying to think of what the reaction would be if CB was like "Oh yeah, Sunnis and Shiites have shed a lot of each others' blood" and had Haqq tear itself apart in a bloody civil war, complete with massacres of noncombatants and so on.
Weren't both of those sects left behind on Earth, though? Could probably spin it as a conflict between Hassassin and Khanate or Hassassins trying to force the "pirating" Qapu Khalki out... I dunno. It's not like Haqq is overpopulated either in terms of sectorials or players. They're in essentially the spot that all main factions ought to be in at this point; two sectorials with a third one coming. All the reasons to be content. Not overly goody-two-shoes elfish, not overly twirly moustache, having avoided the Allahu Akbar tropes entirely, being small enough in the story not to be used as an example or plot point, but not small enough to be a constant underdog with a hero complex to live up to. It's a good faction.
Can't belive people are denying there's been insults beyond criticism. Then you want to argue semantics over specific cases with the moderator. Looks petty, doesn't help to mention DRUMPF for no reason.
@Mahtamori Hassassins are pretty closely linked with Shia Islam, and other groups (Khawarij forex) have their own associations.
Aleph also was like "meh", mainly because we knew we didn't have the numbers to compete with Nomads, PanO or YJ. We shall see in the next campaign, with the "normalization" (whatever rules that will follow, which I am taking a leap of faith and assuming will be good, and we will never be told on what are they based), if Aleph (and now Tohaa, it seems) stop being just a "let's see which faction we ally with", which boils down to PanO (who didn't really need us) or YJ (who did), since Nomads were out of the picture. Now, at least, Haqquislam has both the numbers and the chances to stay up there. The problem there is that the thread is so big, and the warnings were so vague, there is ample room for several people to feel mentioned without real reason. Koni sends the warnings as Private Messages (and if you wanna know how I know ot it, I wasn't warned, I know of this because I was told by someone who was). So, @psychoticstorm aside from using color/quote/whateve to call attention to your Mod Voice, MP to infractors warning them of their transgression should help to avoid this kind of back-and-forth (and sorry if this sounds harsh, that is not my intention).
Being direct just makes people defensive. If one feels like it applies to them they know what to stop. People need to stop getting angry that the hand is too soft, doing it this way for their benefit. No one needs to be called out and have everyone judge them as the "cause".
That's why I think the private message is the way to call people on it, that way there is no feeling that there is a need to protect one's pride in public. And some people have a lot of inertia accumulated regarding Psychoticstorm's position about Uprising, feeling thus that they are being called just for sharing an opinion that is contrarian to his in public. Mind you, the lack of a proofreader at CB's does not surprise me, since the autocorrect came to be a lot of people that were hired for that on newspapers in Spain lost their jobs or were moved to other positions... Sadly, CB's Windows are set in galician, which is not the same as Spanish... and if Interruptor writes it all in galician, then translates it to Spanish (or writes it directly in Spanish), but has galician as the only text the autocorrect recognizes... In case you are wondering, galician is a pseudo-mix of Portuguese and Spanish, with its own things... Like Catalan is a mix of Spanish and French... (bable, the Asturian dialect, is just "inbred" Spanish, and I can say it since I lived there since birth 'till my thirties, thank you ;) ), the fun thing comes when you go to the Vasque, a language nobody is sure where it comes from XD
@xagroth I too send warnings to users by PM, there is absolutely no reason to call out to somebody publicly, when I give generic warnings they are exactly that, generic warnings, not targeted to any individual in particular, generic warnings may happen alongside PM warnings, but if I am to warn a user for behaviour or other issues it happens in PMs.
"Generic" warnings just coincidentally punctuating a discussion daring to call bad writing bad. "Generic" warnings you have now clarified are warnings that you believe it is not permissible for people to call bad writing bad, because calling something bad writing is what you believe to be beyond criticism and instead an insult. Though despite confirming that with a clarification you... apparently deliberately still left out whether that was an official warning or not. And indeed in your latest post have confirmed it IS an official... but "non direct" warning! This is unacceptable behavior on your part. People must be allowed to criticize the writing. Your repeated insistence that mere criticism is unacceptable is utterly outrageous and frankly should require a public apology. And not a vague evasive "but I disagree", a proper statement that it is OK to say that writing is bad, a proper statement supporting the right of people on this form to be critical of even or at least this minor element of the product. We are awaiting your very public very detailed apology.
