Is Armsthrift overrated?

[Scarlet]

According to you, being snarky makes him right?

No, not according to me. That's what you just said.

However, being snarky doesn't make him wrong, either. Being snarky simply makes him snarky. He did in fact respond to a lot of your points, which you chose to ignore because you felt offended by them - that doesn't mean it's good form to be stubborn and repeat the same point until you get a response that you don't feel offended by.

That is all I'm pointing out in this case. No more, no less.

Poor people don't need money as much as rich people do, though both still need money, etc.

This is a flawed comparison.

Still - money is necessary for both these types of people. The "varying" part in this is not how much, but how often - for how many different things.

Bow playthroughs need Armsthrift more than other playthroughs do.

No, that is wrong. Armsthrift isn't needed in any playthrough - neither in yours, nor in a Bow playthrough. It's simply more useful in certain playthroughs than it is in others, which happens to be one of Interceptors points, if I'm not mistaken.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Scarlet

[Chiki]

No, not according to me. That's what you just said.

However, being snarky doesn't make him wrong, either. Being snarky simply makes him snarky. He did in fact respond to a lot of your points, which you chose to ignore because you felt offended by them - that doesn't mean it's good form to be stubborn and repeat the same point until you get a response that you don't feel offended by.

That is all I'm pointing out in this case. No more, no less.

This is a flawed comparison.

Still - money is necessary for both these types of people. The "varying" part in this is not how much, but how often - for how many different things.

No, that is wrong. Armsthrift isn't needed in any playthrough - neither in yours, nor in a Bow playthrough. It's simply more useful in certain playthroughs than it is in others, which happens to be one if Interceptors points, if I'm not mistaken.

Okay, then why isn't how much = how often? Why are they so different that we must distinguish between them?

There's a difference between something that is necessary (a completely essential part of a system) vs. a necessity, as the above definition shows. I am arguing that Armsthrift is not a necessity rather than not a necessary (the words are sometimes used synonymously). Some playthroughs need the necessity more than other playthroughs do.

[Interceptor]

No, that is wrong. Armsthrift isn't needed in any playthrough - neither in yours, nor in a Bow playthrough. It's simply more useful in certain playthroughs than it is in others, which happens to be one of Interceptors points, if I'm not mistaken.

True story. Armsthrift is not "you will fail without this" necessary even in my run, it's simply very useful because of the costs of replacing broken weapons and forges. Alternatives exist without grinding (like Despoil, or Leif's, or just spending less), although not without sacrificing some reliability.

[Scarlet]

Okay, then why isn't how much = how often? Why are they so different that we must distinguish between them?

Because that's just not how the word "necessary" is used. Money isn't more necessary for a rich person than for a poor person, nor the other way around - they both need it in the society we live in. In fact, I don't think you could even argue that the rich person needs money for more things than the poor person, because you could argue that all the additional things the rich person spends money for aren't necessary themselves.

As I said, the comparison is flawed to begin with, which is why I have trouble explaining it.

There's a difference between something that is necessary (a completely essential part of a system) vs. a necessity, as the above definition shows. I am arguing that Armsthrift is not a necessity rather than not a necessary (the words are sometimes used synonymously). Some playthroughs need the necessity more than other playthroughs do.

No, it's the exact same thing.

Armsthrift is not necessary for any playthrough. However, it is useful - more so in some playthroughs than in others.

You could compare it to how a supply of killer or brave weapons will make dealing with enemies a lot easier - which is useful, but not necessary, as you can still win with plain ol' iron or steel.

And that's just what people are saying. Armsthrift is useful if you're worried about your money supply. Most people acknowledge that. It's far from being required. People acknowledge that. Ergo, it's not overrated.

[Chiki]

Because that's just not how the word "necessary" is used. Money isn't more necessary for a rich person than for a poor person, nor the other way around - they both need it in the society we live in. In fact, I don't think you could even argue that the rich person needs money for more things than the poor person, because you could argue that all the additional things the rich person spends money for aren't necessary themselves.

As I said, the comparison is flawed to begin with, which is why I have trouble explaining it.

No, it's the exact same thing.

Armsthrift is not necessary for any playthrough. However, it is useful - more so in some playthroughs than in others.

You could compare it to how a supply of killer or brave weapons will make dealing with enemies a lot easier - which is useful, but not necessary, as you can still win with plain ol' iron or steel.

And that's just what people are saying. Armsthrift is useful if you're worried about your money supply. Most people acknowledge that. It's far from being required. People acknowledge that. Ergo, it's not overrated.

Let's look at your own link.

2. The condition of being needy or necessitous; pressing need; indigence; want.

Hmm. Obviously, you can have degrees of "pressing need," "want," etc. I see no reason to discuss this further.

Edited June 19, 2013 by Chiki

[CT075]

who cares if it's a necessity or not? if i can save 50g by having it save one use on one weapon ever armsthrift is doing its job and being useful

EDIT

yanno for someone who made such a big deal about garnering a community consensus about tier lists and whatnot i find it really ironic that aeine insists on being the only person here to say that useful and necessary are synonyms

Edited June 20, 2013 by CT075

[Chiki]

who cares if it's a necessity or not? if i can save 50g by having it save one use on one weapon ever armsthrift is doing its job and being useful

EDIT

yanno for someone who made such a big deal about garnering a community consensus about tier lists and whatnot i find it really ironic that aeine insists on being the only person here to say that useful and necessary are synonyms

I never said that. Please quote me where I did.

2. The condition of being needy or necessitous; pressing need; indigence; want.

This is the definition I used.

[Elieson]

Can you cite where you originally used that definition? I'd like to know if you posted your definition before all of this bickering started, or after.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Elieson

[Chiki]

Can you cite where you used that? I'd like to know if you posted your definition before all of this bickering started, or after.

Scarlet was kind enough to provide me the exact one I wanted; I was unable to coherently explain which one I was using. Though I posted that I didn't mean absolute necessity in my usage of necessary, CT has a personal problem with me so he likes to ignore whatever he likes to suit his argument.

[Constable Reggie]

No, armsthrift is not necessary. Galeforce is necessary though, of course. In fact, on an objective gradient scale of necessariness, armsthrift is a 1, and galeforce is a 10. Everything else is also a 1.

I present my galeforce playthroughs as evidence. You may try to bring up other kinds of playthroughs to refute this, but of course, pemn, so your playthroughs are invalid.

In short, why are we talking about armsthrift when we should be talking about galeforce

Also, I agree with Elieson's idea that we should make a necessariness of skills tier list, but definitely include complexity into it, because something something intellect.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[CT075]

you can spew definitions you're supposedly using all you want but you're the only one who insists on continuing to argue about necessity when literally everyone else has moved on

[Chiki]

you can spew definitions you're supposedly using all you want but you're the only one who insists on continuing to argue about necessity when literally everyone else has moved on

Nope, Interceptor and Scarlet were still talking about it. I don't really know what your issue is--there's no need to come into this thread for no reason other than to be snarky.

[CT075]

a) as far as i'm concerned being snarky is a reason entirely of itself

b) everything they've said on the topic is in response to you

[Donnel]

Guys I understand you might not agree with what Chiki has to say, but now your just being mean. On to the previous points, technically every playthrough is only personal experience. On to Chiki earlier you said that by neccesary it wasn't essential. Well there kinda of the same thing. Have you ever used armsthrift in a casual run. It can be helpful, but it isn't the best skill in the game and again don't see anybody saying it is.

Sorry to break this to you. From your response, Randa, you have sent a massage of not understanding the context of PEMN they're referring.

No offense, I understand that you may want to defend Chiki since Interceptor is not holding back, but this doesn't really help him.

Poor people don't need money as much as rich people do, though both still need money, etc.

This is a flawed comparison.

Still - money is necessary for both these types of people. The "varying" part in this is not how much, but how often - for how many different things.

That is meant to say - Necessary is Not Equals to Useful, and Not Equals to Want.

From the dictionary, they are other form of words used to explain, aid in what is the meaning of the words.

Just going into Thesaurus, and you'll see that all the words with association or similar meaning doesn't mean they're identical.

Why else who one coined up with a different word for the same meaning.

Have you heard of the fantasy phrase "It grants you what you wants, but not what you needs."

I put down an even more layman valued comparison from your point made earlier.

Poor people don't need money as much as rich people do, though both still need money, etc.

Poor people need $20 to fill their stomach per day.

Rich people need More than $20? Why?

You're comparing between 2 variables that will never intersect from calculation, and the time when it did is call PEMN.

There's no way you'll get an answer out (Vicious cycle) because you're answering questions with questions.

The topic of Usefulness and necessary are actually started by Chiki, and even though we also replied in why armsthift is not Overrated.

Usefulness, necessary != overrated.

Anyway, from the poll, we can tell if majority still think is armsthift is overrated or not.

I have tried explaining, and it may fail to reach out. I understand why Interceptor couldn't be bothered.

I must apologize first if my above text offend anyone in anyway. Sorry, they're not intended.

Check #105, #115.

Edited June 20, 2013 by SirSalute

[Chiki]

That is meant to say - Necessary is Not Equals to Useful, and Not Equals to Want.

2. The condition of being needy or necessitous; pressing need; indigence; want.

Hmmm.

You're simply targeting the wrong idea of necessary. This isn't absolute necessity in the sense that you're arguing for but the definition above. This is necessity in the sense that you want something. Ex: I really want to eat some donuts right now but I'm not going to die without it. But it's necessary in the sense that I want it.

Armsthrift isn't wanted in that way. This is my argument.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Chiki

[Donnel]

Sorry for hijacking your thread.

This thread by itself is entertaining enough to go beyond 7 pages and still counting.

Just wanted to put this.

http://media.animevice.com/uploads/0/6566/182832-quadruple_facepalm_super.jpg

[CT075]

for the record, i don't particularly have any objection to the things aeine is saying (despite the fact that he's apparently convinced that i have some bias against him? on a side note i'm not entirely sure which out of the maybe thirty sentences i've ever directed at him gave this impression) and i don't see a point in arguing with someone i agree with

there isn't any pressing want for armsthrift, true. but i personally think it's mildly useful in that it lets me save 30g for every use of a handaxe it refunds. fine, the game gives you enough money that 30g isn't worth much but money is money. then it also lets me use helswath and the spotpass regalia a bit more before i have to worry about them breaking.

going back to the original topic, i don't find it overrated for the sole reason that i don't see people claiming that armsthrift does any more than what i just said *cough cough galeforce*

[Constable Reggie]

going back to the original topic, i don't find it overrated for the sole reason that i don't see people claiming that armsthrift does any more than what i just said *cough cough galeforce*

Hey guy, does any other skill let you take extra moves and give free blowjobs? No? Then don't be hatin'

If anything, galeforce is underrated.

Edited June 20, 2013 by Constable Reggie

[Da Bear]

Hey guy, does any other skill let you take extra moves and give free blowjobs? No? Then don't be hatin'

If anything, galeforce is underrated.

No. Galeforce does exactly what people say it does. It let's you move twice.

[CT075]

yeah i don't actually see people saying galeforce does more than that either but i had to poke at it

[eclipse]

[spoiler=off topic]

That was kind of you, Randa.

Perhaps he was right about you. Perhaps I'm reading too far into this. Either way, I was NOT expecting this, and I am pleasantly surprised by it. Even if it's small, it's a step in the right direction. Thank you.

Wanting something makes it necessary? How?

[Donnel]

[spoiler=Off-topic]

This above video teaches allot of things. FYI

[Dark Nocturne]

that was quite possibly the dumbest (and most redundant) argument iv ever seen on the internet excepting religious stuff and all i can say is it was entertaining enough to keep me reading for 5 pages lol. im sorry chiki buuut your just wrong on so many levels and i think you should study your internet links a bit more before you post them more than once. also trying to make a failed point over and over is not a way to win a debate. i would switch up your points in a debate and maybe you wont have people getting frustrated and start with so much snark next time. (just a tip)

anyway my opinion is one thats been stated before. it is incredibly useful for keeping ultimate and fragile forged weapons from breaking in the late game, speaking as one who find grinding the IR and GG dlc tedious. and its not terrible to have on a unit just for utility. it isnt needed however but it is useful. i think enough people have stated this that there really shouldn't be an argument anymore. as literally the number of posters whose opinion differed were vastly outnumbered. it is a matter of opinion however. also im in favor of a skill tier to better understand your point

Edited June 20, 2013 by Dark Nocturne

[The Fush]

The most ironic thing about this thread is that it's completely derailed from the point of the title about Armsthrift and has instead spiralled into an argument about who's dictionary is the best

[Folt]

The most ironic thing about this thread is that it's completely derailed from the point of the title about Armsthrift and has instead spiralled into an argument about who's dictionary is the best

Seriously this.

I think this thread has kind of served it's purpose: Mostly everyone agrees that Armsthrift isn't super-amazing, but is still a convenient and useful skill, and we could have let it go pages ago if it wasn't for that massive dictionary derail.