CESSO
Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 09:04 AM CST
Primary generates full TDP allotment.
Secondary a reduced amount that GMs can tool to their target 8x100 or whatever nonsese number you consider
tertiary generates nothing.
I read every post I didn't see something this easy. I also have a similarly very simple idea that would keep game elements the same
but decrease excess TDP production in regard to armor but lets see if you even consider this first idea viable. If so then the second idea only compliments it. Good luck in working it out, im just a game theory guy. Hail DR!
DR-ARMIFER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 09:30 AM CST
Right off the top, any game theory needs to take into consideration that the skill sets do not possess equal numbers of skills.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 10:28 AM CST
>>Right off the top, any game theory needs to take into consideration that the skill sets do not possess equal numbers of skills.
Along with that, it's worth recognizing which skillsets can train multiple things concurrently. I would expect combat-focused skillsets permit for more concurrent training than non-combat-focused skillsets. I know it's a lot easier/faster for me to lock a few weapons/armors than it is to lock a few lores/survivals (magic falls somewhere between both).
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
Along with that, it's worth recognizing which skillsets can train multiple things concurrently. I would expect combat-focused skillsets permit for more concurrent training than non-combat-focused skillsets. I know it's a lot easier/faster for me to lock a few weapons/armors than it is to lock a few lores/survivals (magic falls somewhere between both).
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
DR-RAESH
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 10:37 AM CST
Wasn't this more or less the proposal Socharis floated about pre 3.0 that nearly caused a meltdown in the playerbase?
-Raesh
"It was wise enough to know itself, and brave enough to BE itself, and wild enough to change itself while somehow staying altogether true." ― The Slow Regard of Silent Things
-Raesh
"It was wise enough to know itself, and brave enough to BE itself, and wild enough to change itself while somehow staying altogether true." ― The Slow Regard of Silent Things
TOTLIIO
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 10:43 AM CST
Please, not this convo again.
THEALET
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 10:52 AM CST
IIRC there was a proposal that only X number of top skills from a given skillset would generate TDPs. This could be something to reflect and expand on. I don't remember exactly why that proposal didn't stick, but I believe the issue of the number of possible skills in any given skillset varies from class to class. Choose the number of skills with respect to primary, secondary, and tertiary alignments would help. But then you have Paladins, who have a relatively small number of skills in their primary skillset. Just a thought.
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 10:55 AM CST
sell more pelts, get moremoney
train more skills, get moretdp
rp more rp, get morerpa
dialectically the (train more = get more) still fits.
so (do more = get more) and it is in the (more) portion of tdps where people take issue I assume? Pelts are a set number based on game rules, as are tdp and rpa (rpa being much less guaranteed than the other two).
The (moretdp) has exponential returns compared to the other two, in turn also takes the most time. (only rarely does rp planning and execution log more time than hunting, in my belief and opinion. Money is tied to the train more, get more).
So I feel it is not so much in the training/tdp equation, but in the moretdp output. That is assuming people feel penalized for not training all weapons, or having a large skillset untrainable, or tert.
this practice in dialectic has left me with....give tdps and money instead of rpas? not a boost in experience, but flat tdps? (it also has shown me that tdps are unbalanced in the action-reward theme of other systems)
since sell more pelts are tied to train more(in many instances, not all) they are correlated.
rp more rp is set apart in the action and reward since (in my experience) sellmore and trainmore do not usuually include rp, the action of rp more rp should be braught in line with sellmore and trainmore. that seems to be where the discord therein lay. and rather than diminishing the moretdp, perhaps bring morerpa in line with those two rewards. of course to be thorough you would have to apply this across every action/reward system. Yes, RPAs are weak, and you have to use them INSIDE of trainmore, rather than have it stand on it's own, which it does already and should in an action/reward sense. savvy?
-Munch-
train more skills, get moretdp
rp more rp, get morerpa
dialectically the (train more = get more) still fits.
so (do more = get more) and it is in the (more) portion of tdps where people take issue I assume? Pelts are a set number based on game rules, as are tdp and rpa (rpa being much less guaranteed than the other two).
The (moretdp) has exponential returns compared to the other two, in turn also takes the most time. (only rarely does rp planning and execution log more time than hunting, in my belief and opinion. Money is tied to the train more, get more).
So I feel it is not so much in the training/tdp equation, but in the moretdp output. That is assuming people feel penalized for not training all weapons, or having a large skillset untrainable, or tert.
this practice in dialectic has left me with....give tdps and money instead of rpas? not a boost in experience, but flat tdps? (it also has shown me that tdps are unbalanced in the action-reward theme of other systems)
since sell more pelts are tied to train more(in many instances, not all) they are correlated.
rp more rp is set apart in the action and reward since (in my experience) sellmore and trainmore do not usuually include rp, the action of rp more rp should be braught in line with sellmore and trainmore. that seems to be where the discord therein lay. and rather than diminishing the moretdp, perhaps bring morerpa in line with those two rewards. of course to be thorough you would have to apply this across every action/reward system. Yes, RPAs are weak, and you have to use them INSIDE of trainmore, rather than have it stand on it's own, which it does already and should in an action/reward sense. savvy?
-Munch-
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 11:16 AM CST
>>so (do more = get more) and it is in the (more) portion of tdps where people take issue I assume?
A good way of looking at the TDP issue is this:
The formula of getting a TDP for every 200 "points" of skills gained was developed at a time when the game didn't project people getting skills in the high hundreds, let alone breaking past the thousands. Along with this, the game developers at the time probably didn't expect (for whatever reason) players proactively training skills "just" to get TDPs. Based on how I remember DR being pitched/promoted back in the day, it was more likely meant more as "hey, if you're doing things that don't necessarily make you circle, you won't feel punished stat-wise for doing so."
It really just seems like the original game didn't expect the gross majority of a player's TDPs to come from skills. Definitely keep in mind that the TDP gain model was made at a time when being 20th circle was godlike and rock trolls were seen as the most deadly thing ever.
Similar to how magic 3.0 re-scaled when players can max out a spell in light of how far a player's skills can go, it's probably worth reassessing the speed/rate of TDP gain in a similar manner.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
A good way of looking at the TDP issue is this:
The formula of getting a TDP for every 200 "points" of skills gained was developed at a time when the game didn't project people getting skills in the high hundreds, let alone breaking past the thousands. Along with this, the game developers at the time probably didn't expect (for whatever reason) players proactively training skills "just" to get TDPs. Based on how I remember DR being pitched/promoted back in the day, it was more likely meant more as "hey, if you're doing things that don't necessarily make you circle, you won't feel punished stat-wise for doing so."
It really just seems like the original game didn't expect the gross majority of a player's TDPs to come from skills. Definitely keep in mind that the TDP gain model was made at a time when being 20th circle was godlike and rock trolls were seen as the most deadly thing ever.
Similar to how magic 3.0 re-scaled when players can max out a spell in light of how far a player's skills can go, it's probably worth reassessing the speed/rate of TDP gain in a similar manner.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
SHADOWCHIEF2
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 11:41 AM CST
Yeah this proposed way wouldn't work at all because of the variation between skills per skillset, which has been mentioned.
If people just think the issue is out of control stat growth, just cut down the amount of tdp's per skill by 50% This way people that train more, still get more. Then maybe make top 10 skills out of everything, generate a higher amount of tdp's. This way people that want to do less, can get more, and people that want to still train everything will still generate tdp's per their investment.
If people just think the issue is out of control stat growth, just cut down the amount of tdp's per skill by 50% This way people that train more, still get more. Then maybe make top 10 skills out of everything, generate a higher amount of tdp's. This way people that want to do less, can get more, and people that want to still train everything will still generate tdp's per their investment.
DR-ANNWYL
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 01:37 PM CST
too soon.
Annwyl
Message Board Supervisor
If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing me at DR-Annwyl@play.net.
SQUANTO
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 01:50 PM CST
>>too soon.<<
^
"Brace yourselves, Squanto is going to bleh blah fart fart bleh.." -the player of the character formerly known as Pureblade
^
"Brace yourselves, Squanto is going to bleh blah fart fart bleh.." -the player of the character formerly known as Pureblade
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 02:04 PM CST
but why is the stat growth considered out of control?
as a player who plays many different games, the meta for competitive pvp always entails going above and beyond what is required to simply stay competitive.
if you want to pvp competitively, you train every skill.
in many other games it entails the same, on top of collecting trinkets, temporary buffs, food items ect ect ect. the grind necessary to push the bigger numbers for gear and weapons ect.
I don't see how a character with high stats per circle infringes on the game outside of competitive pvp...
that being said I don't consider DR to be a great vehicle for pvp in the first place (i'll do an fps, or flight combat sim or naval combat sim or a melee combat sim that does not base your performance on an already gained exp number, but on your situational skill, reflexes, awareness, ect ect)
pvp in DR is certainly fun, and it is what is, if you want claim to being the super pro whatever and impose your e-ego on everyone, then you know that you have to train everything in rediculous quantities. those are currently the terms. I don't think they are bad terms, nor good terms, simply the terms.
The answer is somewhere, I think finding the foundation in why it is inherently bad for the game as a whole, finding the definative cassus belli, is paramount before figuring out how to proceed.
-Munch-
as a player who plays many different games, the meta for competitive pvp always entails going above and beyond what is required to simply stay competitive.
if you want to pvp competitively, you train every skill.
in many other games it entails the same, on top of collecting trinkets, temporary buffs, food items ect ect ect. the grind necessary to push the bigger numbers for gear and weapons ect.
I don't see how a character with high stats per circle infringes on the game outside of competitive pvp...
that being said I don't consider DR to be a great vehicle for pvp in the first place (i'll do an fps, or flight combat sim or naval combat sim or a melee combat sim that does not base your performance on an already gained exp number, but on your situational skill, reflexes, awareness, ect ect)
pvp in DR is certainly fun, and it is what is, if you want claim to being the super pro whatever and impose your e-ego on everyone, then you know that you have to train everything in rediculous quantities. those are currently the terms. I don't think they are bad terms, nor good terms, simply the terms.
The answer is somewhere, I think finding the foundation in why it is inherently bad for the game as a whole, finding the definative cassus belli, is paramount before figuring out how to proceed.
-Munch-
BADGOPHER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 02:40 PM CST
I think it's less out of control stat growth and more that the min/max nature of most players means we end up training a bunch of useless skills for more stats. It's not particularly fun. And it plays into what Armifer has said several times. The game should be fun. It should not be a second job.
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 02:51 PM CST
But that is a player cultural issue.
not strictly a mechanical issue.
-Munch-
not strictly a mechanical issue.
-Munch-
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 02:56 PM CST
>>But that is a player cultural issue. not strictly a mechanical issue.
I think the argument is that a player culture develops based on the way mechanics function. If people start feeling like they have to do something (for whatever reason), and many people regard it as work (for whatever reason), then game developers might want to assess if that's the kind of culture they want their game to foster.
But it also stands to reason that a mechanic that has been untouched for a decade and a half of development+ might deserve a second glance to see if it's functioning in a manner that is still appropriate in today's game environment, in light of how much the game chanced since its initial release.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
I think the argument is that a player culture develops based on the way mechanics function. If people start feeling like they have to do something (for whatever reason), and many people regard it as work (for whatever reason), then game developers might want to assess if that's the kind of culture they want their game to foster.
But it also stands to reason that a mechanic that has been untouched for a decade and a half of development+ might deserve a second glance to see if it's functioning in a manner that is still appropriate in today's game environment, in light of how much the game chanced since its initial release.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
FAMEBRIGHT
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 03:14 PM CST
This is the song that never ends? Maybe these threads belong in Claims to the Highest Circle... Anyhoo:
>I think it's less out of control stat growth and more that the min/max nature of most players means we end up training a bunch of useless skills for more stats. It's not particularly fun. And it plays into what Armifer has said several times. The game should be fun. It should not be a second job.
I expect it's both. TDPs make you hypercompetitive in a lot more than just the niche of PVP, and the effect of stats in systems needs to be balanced. You can choose to either (1) expect that players train as many skills as possible as standard balance point of the game, or (2) just not account for people who train all skills. Since scenario 2 is generally unacceptable, development in DR tends to favor in scenario 1 which creates huge barriers to entry and actively dissuades players from playing who won't grind through optimal training. It also means the impact of stats has gone from contributing a fine-turing percentage-point influence in calculations to fractional percentages points with no immediate gameplay feedback. That manages to irk even the spreadsheet-loving players who start threads every month with a wall of data complaining about increasing stats does nothing for crafting or experience or whatever.
The old TDP system encourages unfun gameplay AND unfun gameplay design.
Re: Life mana Spell preps
You raise your hands in the air. You wave them like you just don't care. Somebody says, "Hey!" Somebody says, "Ho!" Somebody screams.
>I think it's less out of control stat growth and more that the min/max nature of most players means we end up training a bunch of useless skills for more stats. It's not particularly fun. And it plays into what Armifer has said several times. The game should be fun. It should not be a second job.
I expect it's both. TDPs make you hypercompetitive in a lot more than just the niche of PVP, and the effect of stats in systems needs to be balanced. You can choose to either (1) expect that players train as many skills as possible as standard balance point of the game, or (2) just not account for people who train all skills. Since scenario 2 is generally unacceptable, development in DR tends to favor in scenario 1 which creates huge barriers to entry and actively dissuades players from playing who won't grind through optimal training. It also means the impact of stats has gone from contributing a fine-turing percentage-point influence in calculations to fractional percentages points with no immediate gameplay feedback. That manages to irk even the spreadsheet-loving players who start threads every month with a wall of data complaining about increasing stats does nothing for crafting or experience or whatever.
The old TDP system encourages unfun gameplay AND unfun gameplay design.
Re: Life mana Spell preps
You raise your hands in the air. You wave them like you just don't care. Somebody says, "Hey!" Somebody says, "Ho!" Somebody screams.
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 03:32 PM CST
it is a fair arguement that mechanics do influence "portions" of the in-game culture.
not necessarily the best portions of the culture, either.
the system has been looked at before. with the introduction of being able to purchase spell slots and it's removal. tho not the mechanic itself, the product of that system has been looked over in the past. the skill merges as well. it wouldn't be the first time it's been looked into.
-Munch-
not necessarily the best portions of the culture, either.
the system has been looked at before. with the introduction of being able to purchase spell slots and it's removal. tho not the mechanic itself, the product of that system has been looked over in the past. the skill merges as well. it wouldn't be the first time it's been looked into.
-Munch-
SHAWN255
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 03:45 PM CST
And each time it has been looked into.. the GMs realize that for the best future benefit of the game it should change.
It is not even slightly balanced as it is right now... nor fun... to have to train everything.
The only reason it hasnt been changed already is mostly due to people freaking out over change.
FRANKYFIGGS
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:20 PM CST
how do you balance between someone who trains everything, and someone who does not?
and catch yourself... you do not HAVE to train anything. you dont even HAVE to circle. see, this is where I feel it is more of a community and cultural issue than an actual mechanics one.
-Munch-
and catch yourself... you do not HAVE to train anything. you dont even HAVE to circle. see, this is where I feel it is more of a community and cultural issue than an actual mechanics one.
-Munch-
FLINT-TIPPED
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:31 PM CST
SHAWN255
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:31 PM CST
Very easily.
You add a top 3 system that completely balances out the skillsets to make tdp gain equal between all 5.
Then, if someone wants to train everything, they are free to. Because the primary reason to train everything should be to be awesome at everything. Not just to gain more TDPs.
Balanced and fun for everyone!
SHAWN255
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:32 PM CST
>>You guys are sadists. Poor Annwyl.
Its friday.. super bored at work... so any kind of discussion/argument perks me right up! ;)
Its friday.. super bored at work... so any kind of discussion/argument perks me right up! ;)
SHAWN255
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:42 PM CST
I would also say the litmus test for the decision behind a top 3 change is pretty simple.
If we were designing this game from the ground up, regardless of what has taken place with the hodgepodge development over the last 20 years, would a top 3 system make the most sense to make tdp generation/acquisition fair across the board?
Yes, it makes it 100% fair so that all skillsets provide the same amount of tdps as people train and level, and it also doesn't penalize some skillsets for having more/less skills than others, and it doesn't penalize anyone that wants to train more skills just because they want to be more rounded.
Again, it makes the game balanced. And if I was designing it from the ground up, that would be the goal. And clearly the GMs can see that as well since it keeps coming up and they want to do something along those lines.
The real question is why the people that DO have tons of skills trained (when they keep shouting that they don't need to)... aren't asking for more details about the change that is almost guaranteed to happen... so that they can prepare for it.
If we were designing this game from the ground up, regardless of what has taken place with the hodgepodge development over the last 20 years, would a top 3 system make the most sense to make tdp generation/acquisition fair across the board?
Yes, it makes it 100% fair so that all skillsets provide the same amount of tdps as people train and level, and it also doesn't penalize some skillsets for having more/less skills than others, and it doesn't penalize anyone that wants to train more skills just because they want to be more rounded.
Again, it makes the game balanced. And if I was designing it from the ground up, that would be the goal. And clearly the GMs can see that as well since it keeps coming up and they want to do something along those lines.
The real question is why the people that DO have tons of skills trained (when they keep shouting that they don't need to)... aren't asking for more details about the change that is almost guaranteed to happen... so that they can prepare for it.
TEVESHSZAT
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 04:45 PM CST
>>how do you balance between someone who trains everything, and someone who does not?
On the TDP side, maybe diminishing returns.
On the skill side, the reward for training all the skills should primarily be the benefit of being able to use them effectively.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
On the TDP side, maybe diminishing returns.
On the skill side, the reward for training all the skills should primarily be the benefit of being able to use them effectively.
Uzmam! The Chairman will NOT be pleased to know you're trying to build outside of approved zones. I'd hate for you to be charged the taxes needed to have this place re-zoned. Head for the manor if you're feeling creative.
NINEVAH1
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 05:13 PM CST
>>The real question is why the people that DO have tons of skills trained (when they keep shouting that they don't need to)... aren't asking for more details about the change that is almost guaranteed to happen... so that they can prepare for it.
Details have been asked for but Armifer is either not willing to share them, yet, or there is not enough details to share at this point. To keep discussing it, until the time they are shared, is a waste of time for me (and I'm guessing for others).
Details have been asked for but Armifer is either not willing to share them, yet, or there is not enough details to share at this point. To keep discussing it, until the time they are shared, is a waste of time for me (and I'm guessing for others).
TALEEK
BADGOPHER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 06:00 PM CST
>Details have been asked for but Armifer is either not willing to share them, yet, or there is not enough details to share at this point. To keep discussing it, until the time they are shared, is a waste of time for me (and I'm guessing for others).
I think it's extremely unfair and prejudicial to say that he isn't willing to disclose details. He has been very explicit in stating he does not have details to share yet, that they don't even have a reasonable thought on what they want to do, let alone how to do it.
Note I'm not accusing you of doing that since the latter half of your post falls in line with where I stand (i.e. until the GMs have details, no reason to talk about it).
I think it's extremely unfair and prejudicial to say that he isn't willing to disclose details. He has been very explicit in stating he does not have details to share yet, that they don't even have a reasonable thought on what they want to do, let alone how to do it.
Note I'm not accusing you of doing that since the latter half of your post falls in line with where I stand (i.e. until the GMs have details, no reason to talk about it).
DR-ARMIFER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 06:03 PM CST
I'd say we have a goal and a sketch of an idea of how to get there -- both of which I shared -- but that specifics are not ironed out.
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
-Armifer
"Perinthia's astronomers are faced with a difficult choice. Either they must admit that all their calculations were wrong ... or else they must reveal that the order of the gods is reflected exactly in the city of monsters." - Italo Calvino
GABRIEL4
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 06:03 PM CST
<<I think it's extremely unfair and prejudicial to say that he isn't willing to disclose details. He has been very explicit in stating he does not have details to share yet,
That's why they have the phrase 'not willing to share them yet' in their sentence that you quoted...
That's why they have the phrase 'not willing to share them yet' in their sentence that you quoted...
BADGOPHER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 07:03 PM CST
>That's why they have the phrase 'not willing to share them yet' in their sentence that you quoted...
Frankly. If you're capable of reading that far, you're most likely capable of reading the remainder.
Frankly. If you're capable of reading that far, you're most likely capable of reading the remainder.
NINEVAH1
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 07:10 PM CST
>>I think it's extremely unfair and prejudicial to say that he isn't willing to disclose details. He has been very explicit in stating he does not have details to share yet, that they don't even have a reasonable thought on what they want to do, let alone how to do it.
I get that, but I also don't know what has happened since then and I tried not to make any assumptions about where things are at right now since I really have no way of knowing. I wasn't accusing Armifer of keeping information from us just to upset us, but I also know that it's not uncommon for them to keep quiet on things until everything figured out. I trust that he will tell us what is important for us to know in a timely manner and listen to what we have to say. I was only answering his question of why people aren't demanding details. We have been told what we are going to be told for now, and until more is said there is no more to say.
>>but that specifics are not ironed out.
These are what I'm looking forward to hearing and what is really worth discussing.
I get that, but I also don't know what has happened since then and I tried not to make any assumptions about where things are at right now since I really have no way of knowing. I wasn't accusing Armifer of keeping information from us just to upset us, but I also know that it's not uncommon for them to keep quiet on things until everything figured out. I trust that he will tell us what is important for us to know in a timely manner and listen to what we have to say. I was only answering his question of why people aren't demanding details. We have been told what we are going to be told for now, and until more is said there is no more to say.
>>but that specifics are not ironed out.
These are what I'm looking forward to hearing and what is really worth discussing.
GABRIEL4
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 07:27 PM CST
>Frankly. If you're capable of reading that far, you're most likely capable of reading the remainder.
You mean the part where you repeated the rest of what they said in their quote? That's not the issue. You misread the first part of their post, which I'm pointing out. You missed the implication of the word yet, and so read it as them suggesting Armifer was being mean and deliberately witholding information. What their posts actually says is that Armifer may be unwilling to divulge details yet for whatever reason - they don't have anything to say about them, they're not set in stone, etc.
As a personal suggestion to you, you really should take 2 minutes to read your own posts with an eye to their tone before you post anything. Most of the time you don't come across very well either because of your tone which is usually either argumentative or petulant, or because you mistakenly assume the worst about the post you're responding to.
You mean the part where you repeated the rest of what they said in their quote? That's not the issue. You misread the first part of their post, which I'm pointing out. You missed the implication of the word yet, and so read it as them suggesting Armifer was being mean and deliberately witholding information. What their posts actually says is that Armifer may be unwilling to divulge details yet for whatever reason - they don't have anything to say about them, they're not set in stone, etc.
As a personal suggestion to you, you really should take 2 minutes to read your own posts with an eye to their tone before you post anything. Most of the time you don't come across very well either because of your tone which is usually either argumentative or petulant, or because you mistakenly assume the worst about the post you're responding to.
BADGOPHER
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 07:35 PM CST
>That's not the issue. You misread the first part of their post, which I'm pointing out.
I did not. I was cautioning other posters not to do so.
>As a personal suggestion to you, you really should take 2 minutes to read your own posts
I do so. I find it doesn't matter, people simply read whatever that want into it.
I did not. I was cautioning other posters not to do so.
>As a personal suggestion to you, you really should take 2 minutes to read your own posts
I do so. I find it doesn't matter, people simply read whatever that want into it.
GABRIEL4
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production
02/26/2016 07:47 PM CST
<<I did not. I was cautioning other posters not to do so.
That is an amusing attempt at backtracking. Thanks for the chuckle.
That is an amusing attempt at backtracking. Thanks for the chuckle.
DR-ANNWYL
Re: Keep the game the same but decrease tdp production::THREAD OVER::
02/26/2016 08:24 PM CST
And we're done.
Annwyl
Message Board Supervisor
If you've questions or comments, take it to e-mail by writing me at DR-Annwyl@play.net.
