10-25-2008, 02:41 AM | #11 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
Wrong than others." :)
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|
10-25-2008, 06:20 AM | #12 |
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Maybe the rule they worked to was KISS. (Keep it simple stupid)
|
10-26-2008, 02:10 AM | #13 | |
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|
10-26-2008, 01:51 PM | #14 | |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The North American Combine
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
I come here to a blow off some steam, have some fun, and discuss a game I enjoy, not to listen to how wonderful everything would have been if only they'd done things they way you wanted it done. While I'll be the first to admit, there were several questionable decisions made, and the game isn't "perfect", it is playable. I'm sure they actually put some thought into the reality vs. playability when they designed the game, and in many cases, playability won out. So I'll please ask you to quit with the snide remarks. Unless you plan on putting out a "superior" product anytime in the future, save the petty comments, and stick to actually discussing the game. If I've offended anyone, or the mods think I'm out of line with my comments, please feel free to tell me so.
__________________
"There is no such thing as a dangerous weapon, only dangerous men." "Death is certain, life is not." "No one assails me without punishment" |
|
10-26-2008, 10:12 PM | #15 |
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Halifax Nova Scotia, Canada
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Well said DSumner, although I will simply not focus my comment on one individual since there seems to be a predominance of bitterness and complaining from a lot more than that going on that's detracting and distracting everyone from the purpose of the Car Wars community at large, which IS as you said to discuss the game itself.
We're gonna be playing [choose your currently available version] for a while to come. I for one want to find the nifty bits without wading through piles of complaints and flames.
__________________
© Some Rights Reserved - Permission and Attribution required |
10-27-2008, 03:26 AM | #16 | |||
Join Date: Dec 2007
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
Labs's site and raising these points would be futile, no? This is where the CW players are; so I must necessarily come here. Oh, and related to the fact that this is a SJG property -- see end of post. Now, the rest of the story: I've tried to be polite with them; I've tried to work within their system. Doing so has brought me naught save frustration and heartache. As it has for all of you -- whether or not you realize it. I have tried the "loyal opposition" approach. I tried, with others, to provide additions and corrections which actually improved the game, as opposed to generation of innumerable "Mr. Fixits" and/or "Oops Pages". No good came of it. So, now, I still Oppose -- but any sense of loyalty I may have felt is long gone. Granted, I will keep my remarks within the confines of the Forum's strictures on Civil Discourse -- but Toeing the Party Line just ain't happenin'. As to liking and disliking: There are certain of the game's editors and designers I do approve of: Haring, Ladyman, and others. Were they, or their works, mentioned more often, you would see positive remarks from me. However, what keeps turning up is references to the Downward Spiral, the days when, due to problems external (the USSS) and internal (I have it on good authority that when one CW/ADQ editor was kicked to the curb, in his desk was found some six months' worth of unopened correspondance...), the game was allowed to sit idle -- or worse, be actively damaged (may the members of RMADA spend eternity duelling _MacArthur_s in _Thresher_s). You speak of Negative Times, you will see Negative Replies. Quote:
mutually-exclusive terms". Therein lies a major part of the problem -- the two *aren't* necessarily exclusive. An example: When a solid moving object hits a solid stationary object, the moving object bounces off at an angle equal to that which it impacted (Ex.: an object hitting at a 30-degree angle will bounce off at a 30-degree angle); the angles will appear as mirror-images of one another. That one sentence answers *every* question anyone will ever ask about objects in CW running into other objects -- cars hitting walls, grenades being "pinballed" around corners, and so on. Simple, straightforward, yet also accurate. (Issues of the "squishiness" of objects need only be expressed as adding to, or subtracting from, the angle in question.) Another example: The Ramplate Debate. The problem here is that the original writing of the ramplate damage rules means the rammer inflicts not 2x damage on the target, but *4x* (ex.: 50 pts. of collision. Rammer takes 25; target 100; 100 / 25 = 4). How to fix this? The "simple" solution would be to remove either the 2x damage to the target, or the 1/2 damage to the rammer. What did we get? Having to add *and* subtract *every* time there's a ram; and the additions and subtractions vary with every ram inflicted. If the idea of a rules fix is to "keep it simple, stupid", how does adding two complete sets of arithmetic problems count as "simple"? *That* is the sort of thing I've been railing against -- the constant requests for "simplicate, and add lightness" being responded to with even more complication. Quote:
checked they had some pretty harsh terms imposed for folks doing the following: -- Advertising Other Folks', Including One's Own, Products; -- Advocating In Any Way Whatever End-Running Copyright Laws. Now, I'll go on the record and say I wouldn't do the second one even if it were allowed here, because doing so would kill whatever market there may still be for _CW_; and because I write stuff myself, and so have some respect for copyright. So, that said: I might have my own game, or I might not. Whichever is the case, I won't be mentioning it here. As to discussing the game: I am -- the game is not just The Rules; it is also the People Behind The Rules. The _CW_ rules did not simply spring into existence fully-formed -- Someone wrote them, and Someone tested them. Thus, the People are fair game for discussion, as much as the Rules they created. And as noted earlier, if the People who wrote the Rules did so in such a poor way as to send the game "circling the drain", then Like It or Not, that's also fair game. If this is bothersome to you, then I Apologize. But I will be hanged if I will sit here and *not* call those responsible on their mistakes.
__________________
"Dale *who*?" 79er The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course: 1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End. |
|||
10-27-2008, 04:26 AM | #17 |
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Nothing wrong with a bit of civil dissent. Stick to your guns 43!
If you dont like what someone is saying then dont read it. Finally if we all sat about and patted SJG on the back for doing a wonderful job in having killed an excellent game insted of ushering in a new era of bigger better more streamlined car wars... Short bus material we would be sir. |
10-27-2008, 05:22 AM | #18 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The North American Combine
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
As I said, I'm not here to get into a pis*ing contest, or start a flame. I've got no problem with people expressing their opinion, or complaining about what htey consider a legitimate flaw (as you can see, players questions or concerns have resulted in a number of rules changes over the years), but what I don't want this forum to turn into a "Lets bash the CW development crew" forum, and lately that's the direction it seems to be heading.
Just take a few minutes and read over some of the recent posts. How many of them are filled with negative comments? Or turn into nothing more than bitch fests where the posters are doing nothing more than complaining how SJG has abandoned there fans, screwed up the game, or are nothing but idiots for not listening to their brilliant suggestions? Come on gentlemen, I understand that as dedicated fans, it frustrating when a product you enjoy isn't receiving the level of support you wish, but the simple fact is, SJG is a money making entity, and they are going to put their efforts in the product that's going to keep the lights on and the paychecks rolling. Until then, instead of crying the blues, how about we concentrate our efforts on actually gaming and enjoying ourselves? If and when SJ does decide to start pushing the CW line again, how many new players do you think the game will attract, if all they ever hear is negative comments on how "broken" or 'screwed up" the system is? With that said, lets get back to blowing the hell out of each other on the duel track.
__________________
"There is no such thing as a dangerous weapon, only dangerous men." "Death is certain, life is not." "No one assails me without punishment" |
10-27-2008, 06:03 AM | #19 | |
Munchkin Line Editor
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
Point 1: There's nothing wrong with advertising things in the proper place. (Leaving aside actual spam, of course, which gets nuked without the merest hint of regret.) There are several subforums here which are dedicated to the discussion of gaming in general (a not-exhaustive list: Roleplaying In General, Card Games In General, Board Games In General) and discussions of non-SJG properties in those places are welcome. Additionally, tasteful, non-spammy links in signature files are usually fine, as long as they're gaming-related. (Don't advertise pr0n, even if you made it yourself. ESPECIALLY then.) As for the delays in getting new CW material released (or old CW material uploaded to e23), I can't say what's going on because I'm not in the office. However, there's nothing sinister in a company choosing to keep tight reins on its intellectual property -- good luck going to Disney and asking them to let you sell bootleg DVDs of the movies and TV shows they're keeping off the market! -- and there's nothing sinister about a company saying, "Sorry, we have to focus our resources on something else right now." Fans have every right to be disappointed, but it would be an error to translate that disappointment into unfounded accusations about SJG and its motives.
__________________
Andrew Hackard, Munchkin Line Editor If you have a question that isn't getting answered, we have a thread for that. Let people like what they like. Don't be a gamer hater. #PlayMunchkin on social media: Twitter || Facebook || Instagram || YouTube Follow us on Kickstarter: Steve Jackson Games and Warehouse 23 |
|
10-27-2008, 06:18 AM | #20 | |
Join Date: Sep 2008
|
Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design
Quote:
When you get back in to the office do you mind finding out why that is and let us know Andrew. :) |
|
|
|