From Killers to Kittens: The Henrik Nystrom Saga

Status
Not open for further replies.

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
See, although i want more reasons for people to fight criminals, i disagree with punishing them more than they already are via the actual systems in the game.

The game needs red players, as this is a player event driven game; the PVE is just a way to make those events occur between players (who'd have thought picking cabbages would be so dangerous).

A solo red is a brutal playstyle as it is now. I don't think people realize just how difficult it is unless they've played like that before. Like, there are no markets in criminal towns, as in, nobody sells anything on them.

This means going to a blue town, where It is extremely risky taking things out of the bank, and using the trade broker. You basically can't use markets anymore, essentially.

OR, you have to be self sufficient and get the resources yourself, which is MASSIVELY time consuming.

That is a HUGE downside.

In turn, they usually either have to resort to swapping characters, or getting someone else to help them, which is very inconvenient for a multitude of reasons.

This is different if they're in a guild, however; as they can likely have everything handed to them. Honestly, if you were to make anything a downside for reds, in terms of a system, it should be for those in guilds. Someone mentioned that there should be "red" guilds.. Essentially where the guild has a collective murder count that runs down even slower than an individual murder count. Anyone in the guild is turned red in relation to the collective guild murder count. It needs to go down very slowly, and be independent of housing a red player, as then they could just kick them out of the guild and go blue again. It should work like a slower version of a player murder count.

But yes... If you punish reds now, you make solo red, which is already extremely difficult, even more impossible, which isn't really fair. I don't expect people to understand how difficult it is unless they've actually played that way, with no help.
Thanks for the response, Sally. I appreciate you sharing your perspective, but I think there’s a bit of misunderstanding about what we’re proposing and how it would actually play out.

First off, let’s talk about the idea that life is “already hard for reds.” On the surface, this might seem true—reds can be attacked by confident blues and bounty hunters—but the reality is that the current system makes it laughably easy for reds to avoid meaningful consequences. Between the conflation of reputation and justice, the short durations of criminal status, and the ability of reds to freely use blue-town amenities, being red in MO2 doesn’t feel like the gritty outlaw fantasy it’s meant to be. Instead, it’s more like cosplaying an outlaw while enjoying all the conveniences of the game’s broader economy.

Yes, reds can be attacked by anyone, but let’s face it: in practice, so can blues. Thanks to the transient nature of criminal status and the glaring flaws in the justice system, much of the ganking in this game is actually done by “blue” players. Whether they’re blue on the outside but red on the inside, or just players who think, “This is a PvP game, so I can attack whoever I like,” the game currently reinforces this behavior.

In reality, solo blues—especially those without guild protection—are just as vulnerable, if not more so, than reds. In fact, I’d argue more so, because everyone knows a solo blue is most likely one of the following: a new player, a crafter, or a PvE’er—and therefore seen as easy prey. A red player, however, is clearly a PvP’er and most likely a skilled one, making them far less appealing as a target. Few players will risk attacking a red, while solo blues are hunted without hesitation.

What we’re proposing doesn’t make life harder for reds—it makes it more meaningful. It would create real consequences for lawlessness while giving reds a more immersive and rewarding experience. The current system doesn’t punish reds, nor does it encourage blues to seek justice—it perpetuates a toxic cycle where griefers thrive, solo players suffer, and meaningful gameplay gets sidelined.

Let’s talk about red towns. Right now, they’re ghost towns because there’s no incentive for reds to use them. Why bother trading in a barren market when you can stroll into a blue town and do business there, even if you’re flagged red? That’s not the gritty, immersive outlaw experience MO2 promises—it’s a broken system that lets reds play on easy mode.

Now, here’s the beauty of what we’re proposing: fixing the justice system wouldn’t make life harder for reds—it would make it better. It might seem counterintuitive at first, but hear me out. Red towns are deserted now because reds (and eventually greys, once thieving is implemented) have no reason to use them. Once the convenience of using blue-town amenities is removed, and red status applies more consistently to lawless players, all of the outlaws will naturally gravitate toward red towns, finally bringing them to life.

Forcing outlaws to use red towns isn’t a punishment—it’s a lifeline. It would create thriving hubs of activity where outlaws can trade, barter, and form proper lawless communities. Think about it: when all reds and greys are funneled into red towns, these places transform from ghost towns into bustling, vibrant marketplaces—something they were always meant to be.

Instead of making reds feel like outcasts eking out an existence in a hostile world, this system would give them a true outlaw experience. They’d have their own towns, their own economy, and their own culture. And if blues want to deal with them? That’s where underground trade mechanics, smuggling, and intermediaries could come into play—deepening the immersion for everyone involved.

The idea that this would “destroy” the game for reds is a misread, I think. It’s actually the status quo that’s harming them. By letting reds avoid playing as actual outlaws, the current system kills what could be one of the most exciting and immersive aspects of the game. A functioning justice system doesn’t punish reds—it rewards them with a world that feels alive and reactive.

To summarize:
  • Fixing the justice system doesn’t kill the red playstyle—it saves it.
  • Red towns become hubs of lawlessness instead of lifeless husks.
  • The outlaw life becomes more immersive and rewarding.
  • Far from making things harder, this would give reds a real sense of identity, belonging, and purpose within the game world.
Curious to hear your thoughts—doesn’t a world like that sound a lot more engaging for reds than the current setup?
 

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
Its AI generated garbage anyways...
Ah yes, because as we all know, AI is the only entity capable of coherent argumentation on these forums. Mind you, the sheer effort required to fine-tune your six-word masterpiece has me reflecting—truly, we are dealing with intellectual titans. One can only imagine the Herculean struggle behind the keyboard as you wrestled with syntax, finally emerging victorious against the insurmountable challenge of basic English.

It’s even funnier considering that your entire “contribution” amounts to a knee-jerk dismissal. And yet, even that required a stealth edit. Imagine being so bad at this that you fail at not saying anything of substance.

But hey, at least you and Tek are united in your shared mission of loudly declaring your complete disinterest in something that you can’t stop replying to.1738045924479.png
 

CherryKush

Well-known member
Jan 25, 2022
303
348
63
Ah yes, because as we all know, AI is the only entity capable of coherent argumentation on these forums. Mind you, the sheer effort required to fine-tune your six-word masterpiece has me reflecting—truly, we are dealing with intellectual titans. One can only imagine the Herculean struggle behind the keyboard as you wrestled with syntax, finally emerging victorious against the insurmountable challenge of basic English.

It’s even funnier considering that your entire “contribution” amounts to a knee-jerk dismissal. And yet, even that required a stealth edit. Imagine being so bad at this that you fail at not saying anything of substance.

But hey, at least you and Tek are united in your shared mission of loudly declaring your complete disinterest in something that you can’t stop replying to.View attachment 6663
Anyone that's used it knows that's what you are doing. You're not fooling anyone Mr. ChatGPT... Perhaps I should fire up Deepseek and have it debate your ChatGPT...

No I'll spare everyone the ridiculousness... 🤣
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
Ah yes, because as we all know, AI is the only entity capable of coherent argumentation on these forums. Mind you, the sheer effort required to fine-tune your six-word masterpiece has me reflecting—truly, we are dealing with intellectual titans. One can only imagine the Herculean struggle behind the keyboard as you wrestled with syntax, finally emerging victorious against the insurmountable challenge of basic English.

It’s even funnier considering that your entire “contribution” amounts to a knee-jerk dismissal. And yet, even that required a stealth edit. Imagine being so bad at this that you fail at not saying anything of substance.

But hey, at least you and Tek are united in your shared mission of loudly declaring your complete disinterest in something that you can’t stop replying to.View attachment 6663
Haha I really didn’t mean to upset you so much sir. Truly. All my engagement with you has been genuine. I even read your rp story. From me trust me that is high praise. Actually wild that you characterized this as loud disinterest. The post that upset you was legitimate criticism even if there were aspects you didn’t like. I crai
 
Last edited:

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
Anyone that's used it knows that's what you are doing. You're not fooling anyone Mr. ChatGPT... Perhaps I should fire up Deepseek and have it debate your ChatGPT...

No I'll spare everyone the ridiculousness... 🤣
By all means, fire up Deepseek and see if it can forge a coherent argument out of what you've offered here. But as the old saying goes: garbage in, garbage out.
 

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,322
1,081
113
Anyone that's used it knows that's what you are doing. You're not fooling anyone Mr. ChatGPT... Perhaps I should fire up Deepseek and have it debate your ChatGPT...

No I'll spare everyone the ridiculousness... 🤣

It is indeed strange that suddenly there are multiple people with long, thoughtful posts when throughout MO history there have been only a few people. I will be honest in saying I haven't read a lot of this shit. lol. I'm usually not a TLDR person, but something does seem amiss. I'm with you there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CherryKush

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
AI garbage. The vocabulary and contrived use of language are evident enough, but the summary is peak AI dribble.
I prefer talking to chatbots, they’re smarter than the avg person, they don’t lie as frequently, don’t have an agenda and don’t get bent out of shape so easily.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CherryKush

MortalEnjoyer42069

Active member
May 4, 2024
203
88
28
I prefer talking to chatbots, they’re smarter than the avg person, they don’t lie as frequently, don’t have an agenda and don’t get bent out of shape so easily.
Chat bots have around a 50% accuracy rate. ChatGPT for instance is notoriously bad.
 

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
Well , well, this collective pivot to "AI bad" seems to me to be more than just a desperate deflection—it’s a tacit admission of defeat. If y'all had even a single compelling counterpoint, a little AI birdie tells me (notably that one you see perched on my shoulder, brandishing that razor sharp spear called “wit”), then you'd be hoisting it like a trophy, shoving it repeatedly in everyone's face. But no, the best you can muster is “It's AI! It doesn’t count!” as if that somehow erases the substance of the argument. If only human logic were as easy to dismiss as ChatGPT.

And the sheer irony of it! Here you are, self-styled hardcore survivalists, champions of the brutal, unforgiving virtual world, reduced to whining that they’re being outmatched by a chatbot. What happened to “git gud”, lads? Is that only for the poor sods you gank outside Tindrem?

It’s truly delightful, because it proves that my arguments are airtight. If there were a weak spot, a single loose thread, you’d be tearing at it with the enthusiasm of a loot-hungry PK, or a pack of ravenous hyenas. Instead, all you have left is petulant grumbling about how we are somehow being unfair by making too much sense.

It’s like a street brawler throwing wild punches, realizing none of them are landing, and then declaring, "This fight doesn’t count because you’re using footwork!"

If anything, the real takeaway here is that you’ve never actually had to argue in good faith before. You’ve spent so long in an echo chamber where griefing = skill, and toxicity = toughness that you don’t know what to do when presented with an argument that can’t just be dismissed with “git gud” or “go play Mario Kart.”

And now? You’re panicking. Because deep down, some part of you knows that if SV ever wakes up and implements real justice, your entire playstyle is finished. And if they don't, well then your beloved game is finished, either way, you lose!
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
Well , well, this collective pivot to "AI bad" seems to me to be more than just a desperate deflection—it’s a tacit admission of defeat. If y'all had even a single compelling counterpoint, a little AI birdie tells me (notably that one you see perched on my shoulder, brandishing that razor sharp spear called “wit”), then you'd be hoisting it like a trophy, shoving it repeatedly in everyone's face. But no, the best you can muster is “It's AI! It doesn’t count!” as if that somehow erases the substance of the argument. If only human logic were as easy to dismiss as ChatGPT.

And the sheer irony of it! Here you are, self-styled hardcore survivalists, champions of the brutal, unforgiving virtual world, reduced to whining that they’re being outmatched by a chatbot. What happened to “git gud”, lads? Is that only for the poor sods you gank outside Tindrem?

It’s truly delightful, because it proves that my arguments are airtight. If there were a weak spot, a single loose thread, you’d be tearing at it with the enthusiasm of a loot-hungry PK, or a pack of ravenous hyenas. Instead, all you have left is petulant grumbling about how we are somehow being unfair by making too much sense.

It’s like a street brawler throwing wild punches, realizing none of them are landing, and then declaring, "This fight doesn’t count because you’re using footwork!"

If anything, the real takeaway here is that you’ve never actually had to argue in good faith before. You’ve spent so long in an echo chamber where griefing = skill, and toxicity = toughness that you don’t know what to do when presented with an argument that can’t just be dismissed with “git gud” or “go play Mario Kart.”

And now? You’re panicking. Because deep down, some part of you knows that if SV ever wakes up and implements real justice, your entire playstyle is finished. And if they don't, well then your beloved game is finished, either way, you lose!
I’m assuming you’re not talking to me but at the same time you seem willing to lump me in on certain things so you could be.

I actually prefer chatbots to people because they are much more logical, honest, and can answer a question directly which almost no human can do.

You wouldn’t be the first person to be triggered by my inability to ever be wrong or outsmarted including by ai.

I am able to divine that you are someone that I already know.

Anyway I gave you a myriad of counterpoints which you seem unwilling to address.

It’s all good buddy I’m not the boogie man you think I am. Be well

As for the others well that’s on them. I tried to provide a stimulating debate.
 

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
"I actually prefer chatbots to people"—yes, I do imagine it’s easier to win arguments when the other party is programmed to be polite. And oh, the sheer gall of "my inability to ever be wrong"—a phrase so profoundly ironic it should be inscribed in gold leaf on the forum’s homepage.

But the pièce de résistance? "I am able to divine that you are someone I already know."

Ah, the great detective at work! Tek, the Sherlock Holmes of MO2, peering into the abyss of usernames, deducing secret identities like a paranoid emperor convinced of hidden traitors in his court.

And of course, the sign-off: "I tried to provide a stimulating debate." Yes, Tek, and I tried to explain quantum mechanics to my dog, but he was more interested in licking his own backside.

If nothing else, your consistency is admirable, my dear fellow. Tragically misguided, infuriatingly self-satisfied, but certainly admirable.
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
"I actually prefer chatbots to people"—yes, I do imagine it’s easier to win arguments when the other party is programmed to be polite. And oh, the sheer gall of "my inability to ever be wrong"—a phrase so profoundly ironic it should be inscribed in gold leaf on the forum’s homepage.

But the pièce de résistance? "I am able to divine that you are someone I already know."

Ah, the great detective at work! Tek, the Sherlock Holmes of MO2, peering into the abyss of usernames, deducing secret identities like a paranoid emperor convinced of hidden traitors in his court.

And of course, the sign-off: "I tried to provide a stimulating debate." Yes, Tek, and I tried to explain quantum mechanics to my dog, but he was more interested in licking his own backside.

If nothing else, your consistency is admirable, my dear fellow. Tragically misguided, infuriatingly self-satisfied, but certainly admirable.
Yeah, yeah. Your admiration is well founded.

Anyway if you want to debate things on their merits going forward, should you make any new threads, as these ones are cooked, I’m willing to do so. Again I feel the hostility was largely unnecessary as I never had any ill intent.

Otherwise I wish you well going forward
 

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
Yeah, yeah. Your admiration is well founded.

Anyway if you want to debate things on their merits going forward, should you make any new threads, as these ones are cooked, I’m willing to do so. Again I feel the hostility was largely unnecessary as I never had any ill intent.

Otherwise I wish you well going forward
Oh, Tek, before you go, a parting thought—do you realize you’ve just spent all this time furiously debating a chatbot? Because that’s what you and your esteemed colleagues have been insisting, no? And yet, here you are, valiantly pressing on, passionately arguing with what you claim is an emotionless AI. Makes one wonder—do you enjoy losing debates this much, or do you simply thrive on the illusion of control? I mean, you did just say you enjoy debating an AI more than people, right?
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
Oh, Tek, before you go, a parting thought—do you realize you’ve just spent all this time furiously debating a chatbot? Because that’s what you and your esteemed colleagues have been insisting, no? And yet, here you are, valiantly pressing on, passionately arguing with what you claim is an emotionless AI. Makes one wonder—do you enjoy losing debates this much, or do you simply thrive on the illusion of control? I mean, you did just say you enjoy debating an AI more than people, right?
Ughh, Jesus, did I really just get baited?

Alright here we go

I never claimed that you were not human. You’re using ai which is fine, I don’t care if anything it enhances the argument, it certainly has a much better personality than you. Idk how many times I’ve told you I like AI. You’re really just arguing with me at this point only to hurl insults.

I never did shit to you leave me alone. Sorry you got hurt by something. I probably got way too close to the truth with the qualified to be henriks top advisor.

I’ve made multiple good faith arguments to explain myself at this point you’re seeming unhinged and insane.

Lastly shut the fuck up pussy because now I’m actually getting mad.
 

WeAreAllMortal

Active member
Jan 5, 2025
104
44
28
Ughh, Jesus, did I really just get baited?

Alright here we go

I never claimed that you were not human. You’re using ai which is fine, I don’t care if anything it enhances the argument, it certainly has a much better personality than you. Idk how many times I’ve told you I like AI. You’re really just arguing with me at this point only to hurl insults.

I never did shit to you leave me alone. Sorry you got hurt by something. I probably got way too close to the truth with the qualified to be henriks top advisor.

I’ve made multiple good faith arguments to explain myself at this point you’re seeming unhinged and insane.

Lastly shut the fuck up pussy because now I’m actually getting mad.

Ah, Tek. For all your claims of rising above such trivial matters, here you are—baited, hooked, and flopping on the deck for all to see. And let’s be honest, you weren’t just baited; you were owned. Not just now, not just today, but consistently. It’s simply taken you this long to realize it.

In a desperate bid to counter, you’ve tangled yourself in contradictions so thick they resemble a panicked flurry of parries—all of them in the wrong direction. If, as you claim, I’m simply “letting AI do all the talking,” then how, pray tell, have you formed an opinion about my personality? You confidently declare that AI has a “much better” one than me—fascinating, given that by your own account, you’ve never spoken to me at all.

That’s rather like condemning a ghost, unseen and unconfirmed, for its poor social skills.

But credit where credit is due, Tek: you have managed to construct a veritable Matryoshka doll of cognitive dissonance, each layer more contradictory than the last. And at its core? The simple truth you refuse to acknowledge: you don’t actually believe your own nonsense. Your "AI bad" angle was never about AI—it was just a convenient excuse to dismiss arguments you couldn’t refute.

I must say, I almost admire your sheer commitment to flailing excuses. If logic were PvP, you’d be that poor sod getting juggled into oblivion, furiously mashing buttons, swearing blind that you’re actually winning.

At the end of the day, you’re not mad because of AI. You’re mad because you lost. And the best part? You lost to someone you insist isn’t even thinking for himself. Imagine being that bad at debating.

Which brings me to this glorious nugget of self-aggrandizement you so helpfully supplied:
1738160439394.png
“You wouldn’t be the first person to be triggered by my inability to ever be wrong or outsmarted, including by AI.”

Oh, Tek.

The fact that you phrase this divine pronouncement as an inability—as though it were some tragic affliction you must endure—almost makes me pity you. Almost.

But instead of wisely rethinking this verbal turd before hurling it into the public square, you attempt to polish it, hoping that couching sheer arrogance as a burden makes it more palatable. Not only are you never wrong (a claim normally reserved for deities, not men), but you go further—you cannot even be outsmarted! Not by mere mortals, nor even by AI, the very thing designed to surpass human intelligence.

One is left to wonder—why have we not all abdicated before the supreme and uniquely enlightened entity that is Tek? Why does humanity even bother when such a flawless being walks among us?

Tell us, Tek: Are you the earthly incarnation of a supreme, omniscient force? Should we notify the United Nations at once? Expect their call.

But alas, reality is often disappointing. You are not the infallible being you so desperately imagine yourself to be. No divine ruler, no omniscient strategist—just another forum goblin, shrieking at the light.

And since you seem to struggle with understanding your own role in this little ecosystem, let’s turn to nature for a fitting analogy:
The shit flies, as is their nature, buzz and sting, oblivious to anything beyond their own incessant agitation. If they are capable of imagining anything at all, it is that they rule the stable, sovereigns of their little filth-strewn domain. Yet in truth, their ceaseless droning only rouses the horses, whose neighing in turn attracts the stablehands and owners. And once present, these caretakers, seeing to their charges, take a measure of satisfaction in also swatting the flies—for both duty and amusement.
So please, Tek, do keep buzzing. The stablehands are listening.
 

Teknique

Well-known member
Jun 15, 2020
1,955
1,445
113
Ah, Tek. For all your claims of rising above such trivial matters, here you are—baited, hooked, and flopping on the deck for all to see. And let’s be honest, you weren’t just baited; you were owned. Not just now, not just today, but consistently. It’s simply taken you this long to realize it.

In a desperate bid to counter, you’ve tangled yourself in contradictions so thick they resemble a panicked flurry of parries—all of them in the wrong direction. If, as you claim, I’m simply “letting AI do all the talking,” then how, pray tell, have you formed an opinion about my personality? You confidently declare that AI has a “much better” one than me—fascinating, given that by your own account, you’ve never spoken to me at all.

That’s rather like condemning a ghost, unseen and unconfirmed, for its poor social skills.

But credit where credit is due, Tek: you have managed to construct a veritable Matryoshka doll of cognitive dissonance, each layer more contradictory than the last. And at its core? The simple truth you refuse to acknowledge: you don’t actually believe your own nonsense. Your "AI bad" angle was never about AI—it was just a convenient excuse to dismiss arguments you couldn’t refute.

I must say, I almost admire your sheer commitment to flailing excuses. If logic were PvP, you’d be that poor sod getting juggled into oblivion, furiously mashing buttons, swearing blind that you’re actually winning.

At the end of the day, you’re not mad because of AI. You’re mad because you lost. And the best part? You lost to someone you insist isn’t even thinking for himself. Imagine being that bad at debating.

Which brings me to this glorious nugget of self-aggrandizement you so helpfully supplied:
View attachment 6667
“You wouldn’t be the first person to be triggered by my inability to ever be wrong or outsmarted, including by AI.”

Oh, Tek.

The fact that you phrase this divine pronouncement as an inability—as though it were some tragic affliction you must endure—almost makes me pity you. Almost.

But instead of wisely rethinking this verbal turd before hurling it into the public square, you attempt to polish it, hoping that couching sheer arrogance as a burden makes it more palatable. Not only are you never wrong (a claim normally reserved for deities, not men), but you go further—you cannot even be outsmarted! Not by mere mortals, nor even by AI, the very thing designed to surpass human intelligence.

One is left to wonder—why have we not all abdicated before the supreme and uniquely enlightened entity that is Tek? Why does humanity even bother when such a flawless being walks among us?

Tell us, Tek: Are you the earthly incarnation of a supreme, omniscient force? Should we notify the United Nations at once? Expect their call.

But alas, reality is often disappointing. You are not the infallible being you so desperately imagine yourself to be. No divine ruler, no omniscient strategist—just another forum goblin, shrieking at the light.

And since you seem to struggle with understanding your own role in this little ecosystem, let’s turn to nature for a fitting analogy:

So please, Tek, do keep buzzing. The stablehands are listening.
Honestly at this point I just feel bad for you. I had to restrain myself from bursting out laughing in public. You’re pathetic. I still don’t understand what you got triggered about though. Anyway, if you wanted to be constructive you would have by now. So much hatred sir for someone who did nothing to you, you may want to get yourself some help. I’ve also not said pretty much any of the things that you said that I have said, because you are a malicious liar, but such is the company Henrik keeps for all to witness. For shame

Yeah I’ve taken an L or two but certainly not by you, not on this persona of yours anyway. But that’s how g’s walk. I know that you wouldn’t understand as you possess precisely 0 redeeming/admirable qualities.
 
Last edited:

Emdash

Well-known member
Sep 22, 2021
3,322
1,081
113
Well , well, this collective pivot to "AI bad" seems to me to be more than just a desperate deflection—it’s a tacit admission of defeat. If y'all had even a single compelling counterpoint, a little AI birdie tells me (notably that one you see perched on my shoulder, brandishing that razor sharp spear called “wit”), then you'd be hoisting it like a trophy, shoving it repeatedly in everyone's face. But no, the best you can muster is “It's AI! It doesn’t count!” as if that somehow erases the substance of the argument. If only human logic were as easy to dismiss as ChatGPT.

And the sheer irony of it! Here you are, self-styled hardcore survivalists, champions of the brutal, unforgiving virtual world, reduced to whining that they’re being outmatched by a chatbot. What happened to “git gud”, lads? Is that only for the poor sods you gank outside Tindrem?

It’s truly delightful, because it proves that my arguments are airtight. If there were a weak spot, a single loose thread, you’d be tearing at it with the enthusiasm of a loot-hungry PK, or a pack of ravenous hyenas. Instead, all you have left is petulant grumbling about how we are somehow being unfair by making too much sense.

It’s like a street brawler throwing wild punches, realizing none of them are landing, and then declaring, "This fight doesn’t count because you’re using footwork!"

If anything, the real takeaway here is that you’ve never actually had to argue in good faith before. You’ve spent so long in an echo chamber where griefing = skill, and toxicity = toughness that you don’t know what to do when presented with an argument that can’t just be dismissed with “git gud” or “go play Mario Kart.”

And now? You’re panicking. Because deep down, some part of you knows that if SV ever wakes up and implements real justice, your entire playstyle is finished. And if they don't, well then your beloved game is finished, either way, you lose!

Want some shit to paste into a box and index? Go to my profile and take all of my posts that aren't troll posts and put them in and have it summarize it. Then read it. Then generate a response.

I got 3000 messages, and when the shitlauch happened, I came thru and deleted my posts. I doubt you have the moxie to even bot 3k messages haha. GL tho.

If people are paying you guys to shitpost, it's a sad troll from Henrik. I would have taken said pittance and fixed his game! These forums cannot be energized. And I can prove I'm not a bot because I generate much video content when I play, too. :d No bot can do what I do. mahaha. I do not fear AI taking my spot in the world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.