Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Board and Card Games > Car Wars

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-25-2008, 02:41 AM   #11
43Supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by MIB 1473
Nah. There's no evidence for consistently believable weights anywhere else in the game, so there's no reason to think that was the logic here.
Well, with apologies to Orwell: "All numbers are Wrong -- but some are More
Wrong than others." :)
__________________
"Dale *who*?"

The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course:
1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End.
43Supporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2008, 06:20 AM   #12
Scurv
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Maybe the rule they worked to was KISS. (Keep it simple stupid)
Scurv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 02:10 AM   #13
43Supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurv
Maybe the rule they worked to was KISS. (Keep it simple stupid)
Maybe -- personally, I think there's an "and" missing in there.... :P
__________________
"Dale *who*?"

The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course:
1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End.
43Supporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 01:51 PM   #14
DSumner
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The North American Combine
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by 43Supporter
Maybe -- personally, I think there's an "and" missing in there.... :P
43Supporter, I'm not trying to be rude, but lately, it seems all you want to do is chime in with snarky comments, and jibes at SJG. While I too wish they'd either update, or reprint the rules, I do tire of you doing nothing but bad mouthing the game designers, and editors of ADQ. You constantly belittle them, call them idiots, and say how wrong every decision they made is just flat out wrong, yet here you are. If you dislike what they've done, then why continue to post here?

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"
DSumner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2008, 10:12 PM   #15
Bozamus
 
Bozamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Near Halifax Nova Scotia, Canada
Default 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
Bozamus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 03:26 AM   #16
43Supporter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by DSumner
43Supporter, I'm not trying to be rude, but lately, it seems all you want to do is chime in with snarky comments, and jibes at SJG. While I too wish they'd either update, or reprint the rules, I do tire of you doing nothing but bad mouthing the game designers, and editors of ADQ. You constantly belittle them, call them idiots, and say how wrong every decision they made is just flat out wrong, yet here you are. If you dislike what they've done, then why continue to post here?
First off, the obvious: _CW_ is a SJG Property. Going to, say, Catalyst Game
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:
Originally Posted by DSumner
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.
It's funny you should mention this -- the issue of "realism vs. playability as
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:
Originally Posted by DSumner
Unless you plan on putting out a "superior" product anytime in the future, save the petty comments, and stick to actually discussing the game.
OK, here's the hard part: This is, taken for all in all, SJG's forum. Last I
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*?"

The Jeremy Clarkson Debate Course:
1) I'm Right. 2) You're Wrong. 3) The End.
43Supporter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 04:26 AM   #17
Scurv
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default 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.
Scurv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 05:22 AM   #18
DSumner
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: The North American Combine
Default 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"
DSumner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 06:03 AM   #19
Andrew Hackard
Munchkin Line Editor
 
Andrew Hackard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by 43Supporter
OK, here's the hard part: This is, taken for all in all, SJG's forum. Last I
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.
Point 2: Yes. Absolutely. Don't do it.

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, Steve Jackson Games

Twitter: @SJGames || Facebook: SJ Games and Munchkin || Medium: @SJGames
Instagram: @stevejacksongames || YouTube: Steve Jackson Games

New Munchkin player? Visit our Munchkin 101 forum!
Andrew Hackard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2008, 06:18 AM   #20
Scurv
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Default Re: Car Wars 5e Vehicle Design

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard
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.

When you get back in to the office do you mind finding out why that is and let us know Andrew. :)
Scurv is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.