Wanted to ask the csa how they have liked the last few days getting the union side

[sal_tuskin]

it is sad we have to make a point as the csa to show how the op the union is, we played the union the last few days and we have not lost one map and capped every map playing as the union if that doesnt show op the union is with the rifles they get and the advantages they get in tickets and morle it isnt funny

hoping the dev took notice and will some game changes to help the csa be more competitive it was fun with the sharps against the 1842 just a waste of time

[David Dire]

"Morale" definitely shouldn't be a thing at all with rebs on burnsides bridge. They also shouldnt get an out of line penalty when using smoothbores.

[John Cooley]

Our Decision to "Go Union" for the past 2 weeks has been an attempt to gather data and prove a point.
We discussed this in this thread HERE (http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4741-State-of-Affairs-as-of-10-30-17&highlight=state) after week 1 and this weekend's results will be posted below after we have had time to complete our Corps AAR (After Action Report) however ...
In short, it was a weekend of slaughter capping a 2 week period in which we have yet to lose a single point EVER.
The current system is so skewed toward Union Dominance that being a Reb is synonymous with being a Pop-up Target, NO MATTER who plays as Confederate.

This is an attempt to help the game retain its current crop of dejected and frustrated Testers so that the Union doesn't have to test both sides. Balance will certainly come as we get closer to BETA and Launch but I fear we will not get there very quickly if we can not motivate anyone to Test a system that guarantees them loss after loss, no matter how "Historically Accurate" that may be.

The Devs and Mods have heard our complaints and are discussing changes so I don't expect us to have to play Union to prove our point much longer but ...
Again, I will post what I did before, in the previous thread, and for which we have received no offers of acceptance ...


We invite any Union company to meet us on the Servers and we will gladly endure the itch, smell and rash that we suffer from wearing those pretty Blue Uniforms with Skunk Tail Hats so we can change your minds on this matter ... as we did those who faced us last week.

[Charles Caldwell]

I can remember before the morale system the Union complaining that the CSA were OP.... clearly this see-sawing of balance needs to find its equilibrium.

I played briefly over the weekend and found all games lost to the Union, despite some great CSA team play.

[jwhal]

Seems to me there needs to be a more balanced ticket system with the current game mechanics. And also more thought given to what weapons are used in the maps. Sharps vs 1842's in open field maps are to big of a mismatch. JMO

[Hienzman]

Our Decision to "Go Union" for the past 2 weeks has been an attempt to gather data and prove a point.
We discussed this in this thread HERE (http://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4741-State-of-Affairs-as-of-10-30-17&highlight=state) after week 1 and this weekend's results will be posted below after we have had time to complete our Corps AAR (After Action Report) however ...
In short, it was a weekend of slaughter capping a 2 week period in which we have yet to lose a single point EVER.
The current system is so skewed toward Union Dominance that being a Reb is synonymous with being a Pop-up Target, NO MATTER who plays as Confederate.

This is an attempt to help the game retain its current crop of dejected and frustrated Testers so that the Union doesn't have to test both sides. Balance will certainly come as we get closer to BETA and Launch but I fear we will not get there very quickly if we can not motivate anyone to Test a system that guarantees them loss after loss, no matter how "Historically Accurate" that may be.

The Devs and Mods have heard our complaints and are discussing changes so I don't expect us to have to play Union to prove our point much longer but ...
Again, I will post what I did before, in the previous thread, and for which we have received no offers of acceptance ...

My men and I 100% agree with you sir, it's just that Yankee blue really doesn't look good on us and therefore we despise playing as Union. Deo Vindice

[John Cooley]

LOL Yes it is quite painful.
During sick call we have seen an uptake in the number of soldiers developing rashes, indecisiveness and an increase in voice pitch.

We are currently discussing whether to continue this experiment/lesson for one more week OR until the next patch.
My fear is that if we don't get our Boys back in their beloved Greys soon we might actually see some desertions.

[Bravescot]

OR, and I'm just spit balling here, you guys are just REALLY bad! Just an idea and the same one you threw as the US units when they voiced dissatisfaction.

[Hienzman]

OR, and I'm just spit balling here, you guys are just REALLY bad! Just an idea and the same one you threw as the US units when they voiced dissatisfaction.

There is no reason to say we are really bad. I don't know how often you play but the CSA is well organized and when we do play as CSA we do win it just takes a huge amount of effort and organization. Just recently we had a 52 to 14 kill victory. Such provocative talk often leads to unneeded arguments instead of an efficient fix or mutual understanding of the problem.

[jwhal]

There is no reason to say we are really bad. I don't know how often you play but the CSA is well organized and when we do play as CSA we do win it just takes a huge amount of effort and organization. Just recently we had a 52 to 14 kill victory. Such provocative talk often leads to unneeded arguments instead of an efficient fix or mutual understanding of the problem.

This is standard operating procedure for Bravesquat.

[Fubar]

OR, and I'm just spit balling here, you guys are just REALLY bad! Just an idea and the same one you threw as the US units when they voiced dissatisfaction.

Bravesquat, I'm not entirely sure why you even make posts on the forums. You only ever seem to be after confrontation and hardly ever post anything constructive. No disrespect intended. We are trying very hard to let go of the past an move forward in a positive direction. We want to cease the back and forth confrontations that are never constructive and hurt the community.

[TrustyJam]

Keep the feedback coming gents - preferably coming from the Union gents as well. Please try to stay as unbiased regarding this as possible (keep jabs at each other out of balance talks please).

As stated in the formation buff deployment patch you shouldn't expect the balance to be anywhere near perfect (in fact you should expact that during the alpha, period). The morale ratio at the moment is identical to what it was before the deployment of the formation buff system (where the CSA was winning most battles). While no one can say for certain until having playtested new systems in regards to balance, I was pretty sure a nerf to the defending team was needed before the deployment of the system (hence why we decreased the defending teams morale by 10% compared to the attackers across the board with its introduction). This was done due to us thinking advancing while being in a formation is much harder than being relative stationary at a defensive position while maintaining it - which we still very much believe.

Expect balance to be messed up again and again with the introduction of new gameplay systems such as the flag bearer spawns, etc.

- Trusty

[Numitor]

What is there to say. Right now the Union has a very easy time on most maps. I also think that the capture points on certain maps like Hooker's Push or Pry Ford aren't particularly grateful for the CSA as they are simply sat in a field with no real cover while the Union can just blast away at them from distance while enjoying good cover.


Edit: That and the fact that the Union usually has the better weapons makes for a rather one sided experience.

[jwhal]

Are you saying that the attackers get more tickets then the defenders? So when Union is attacking the CSA has more tickets?

[TrustyJam]

Are you saying that the attackers get more tickets then the defenders? So when Union is attacking the CSA has more tickets?

Tickets are no longer used. They've been converted to a morale amount instead. But yes, the attacker always has more starting morale than the defender (currently the ratio between them is identical to when the CSA won most rounds before the formation buff deployment).

- Trusty

[Saris]

Shouldn't the defender have the advantage? Until we can actually raise morale, the game will be unbalanced

[TrustyJam]

Shouldn't the defender have the advantage? Until we can actually raise morale, the game will be unbalanced

No. Giving the defender a morale advantage over the attacker would mean a victory for the defender every time (unless the attackers manage to capture the area).

It is identical in other games that use a ticket based system - the attackers always have the numbers on their side while the defender has the position on theirs.

- Trusty

[John Cooley]

And Please understand that we know there will be imbalance.
We expect it and we even thrive on it but the issue we are trying to illustrate is how extreme the current imbalance has become.

It has been incremental, to be sure, but the cumulative effect is an unwinnable situation for the CSA.
When this assertion was mocked by our Union friends we decided to let them walk a mile or twenty in our shoes.
Some have seen the light but since it appears that not many have ...
We will continue to play as the Union and heartily invite the Unionists to leave their Forum Strongholds and see for themselves, by meeting us in battle.

[John Cooley]

To reiterate the difference since we started playing as Yanks ...
BEFORE CHANGES:
We would play about 3 to 5 skirms per event with almost all containing several changes of Point Control and wins for the CSA. Most times when CSA was on defense we fought until the Timer ran out.
AFTER CHANGES:
We couldn't win a single skirm. Many adjustments to tactics were tried to no avail.
AS UNION:
We play around 15 to 20 skirms per event with ZERO lasting the entire length of the Timer. Over the past two weeks we have played 12 events and close to 100 skirms with not a single loss. The Rebs could never control the point for any length of time and most battles lasted fewer than 8 minutes.

This is regardless of who is on Attack or Defense but merely a difference in the personnel who are playing as Union soldiers.

[JohnDewitt]

I've played both sides and as a veteran roleplayer I am unbiased towards any side. The weapons I believe are fine on either side, including the smooth bores. They are outdated by the time of the civil war but sometimes you just have to make do with what you get. That was a reality for both sides so you'll have to adapt and use tactics suitable for your armaments. Where the difference between the Union and the CSA lies is in how easy it is to bring CSA morale to breaking.

As the CSA you cannot afford one single slip up or you will lose. Now you might say "but you slipped up so don't you deserve to lose?" To that I respond that its in the leeway either side gets. You're bound to slip up at least once in a fight. But the Union can afford to slip up, and more than once and still win. So unless the CSA team pulls off a pristine perfect round they'll lose against even a mediocre Union effort.

I believe that during the battle of Antietam the US only brought 3/4 of their army into battle at any one time, against nearly 100% of the CSA army. This allowed Lee to move his forces around and prevent a critical force concentration by the US. In game play this would mean that the CSA would start most fights with nearly equal morale as the US as they'd both have a roughly equal number of "effective combatants".

I would like to add though that a lot of the current set of maps require a very specific set of steps to win. I've seen a lot of CSA commanders disregard these (or be unaware of them) and the rebs did lose many rounds because of this. That's a personal observation of mine. To illustrate: taking your time reloading, forming a column and double time it to the point at Burnside Bridge and even going as far as all of them waiting for the point to turn full red before looking what's going on at the actual bridge it self. I've seen it happen more than once and it equals a near automatic loss.

So TL:DR: part of it is undue morale difference, part of it CSA commanders making common mistakes.

(and here I go giving advice anyway even though I said I gave up on leading ._.)

[jwhal]

You might want to consider a review of the maps and the units you put against each other. Hookers push being the most glaring example of a advantage to one side. The CSA defends the point in a open field with mostly 1845 smooth bores a moral disadvantage with no cover. The USA attacks with Sharps and other superior weapons to the CSA. The USA stops at the last fence for cover. They have moral advantage weapon advantage cover advantage. The CSA can just sit and watch each other get picked of because they would be lucky to hit the enemy at that distance without the fence there. It is clearly a map waiting for the USA victory. At the least give the CSA unites with weapon to give them a chance for victory. I am sure a review of the maps can be done and reconfigured to make things fair for both sides.

[Saris]

I honestly don't see anything wrong with the weaponry, the Confederates had to make due with what they had, meaning that they had to use older guns compared to the north. Also the Confederates were fighting a force that was double their number and the federals did not even field their whole force. The confederates had to use what terrain they had to even out the fighting.

[Fubar]

I am so tired of everyone bringing up the Historical accuracy. Yes, we know the confeds lost the war, however the Nazis also lost and there are plenty of games out there that are balanced enough so that they can win. Something's should be as historically accurate as possible(Maps, uniform detail, weapon detail...) but something's cant be because this is a Game. Why are so many people forgetting that this is a GAME!!! I don't think anyone is playing this game and expecting to loss because there on the confeds. The game has to be balanced for both teams to have a even chance at winning and then let skill do the rest. We all know the damn history! GAMES are meant to be competitive, that's there attraction. I am very passionate about the Civil War, I have more than 5 ancestors that fought it, however I also realize that this is a game and if I want historical accuracy I should go reenact. I'm just so tired of people using historical accuracy to defend the position on a GAME! Historically the Civil War was not fought behind a keyboard!

On another note. Trusty Jam suggested we be unbiased and natural in our discussions. Well I feel as though the community im apart of (Second Core) has made one of the only attempts at doing so willingly. All weekend we deicide to play as union, and we are all in CSA company's but we played union. We did so for many reasons some you've heard already in this thread others you have not. We made the choice to step over to the other side and see what it was like to play as union. We learned the maps from the union side, we learned that the union are allowed to make mistakes and not feel as though they will loss for that mistake. We also learned that the union blues stick out more in the corn field than the the Confed grays. My point is that we have made every attempt to stay snatural and unbiased in our opinions of the game than many others. I would love to see the same from the Union company's. Play as confed, take the opportunity to see why we are bringing this up in the forums before you bash us, have facts and keep a positive attitude when discussing such things. In the end we should all be on one side and that's the success of this Game, WE SHOULD WANT WAR OF RIGHTS TO WIN!!!

[JohnDewitt]

I am so tired of everyone bringing up the Historical accuracy. Yes, we know the confeds lost the war, however the Nazis also lost and there are plenty of games out there that are balanced enough so that they can win. Something's should be as historically accurate as possible(Maps, uniform detail, weapon detail...) but something's cant be because this is a Game. Why are so many people forgetting that this is a GAME!!! I don't think anyone is playing this game and expecting to loss because there on the confeds. The game has to be balanced for both teams to have a even chance at winning and then let skill do the rest. We all know the damn history! GAMES are meant to be competitive, that's there attraction. I am very passionate about the Civil War, I have more than 5 ancestors that fought it, however I also realize that this is a game and if I want historical accuracy I should go reenact. I'm just so tired of people using historical accuracy to defend the position on a GAME! Historically the Civil War was not fought behind a keyboard!

On another note. Trusty Jam suggested we be unbiased and natural in our discussions. Well I feel as though the community im apart of (Second Core) has made one of the only attempts at doing so willingly. All weekend we deicide to play as union, and we are all in CSA company's but we played union. We did so for many reasons some you've heard already in this thread others you have not. We made the choice to step over to the other side and see what it was like to play as union. We learned the maps from the union side, we learned that the union are allowed to make mistakes and not feel as though they will loss for that mistake. We also learned that the union blues stick out more in the corn field than the the Confed grays. My point is that we have made every attempt to stay snatural and unbiased in our opinions of the game than many others. I would love to see the same from the Union company's. Play as confed, take the opportunity to see why we are bringing this up in the forums before you bash us, have facts and keep a positive attitude when discussing such things. In the end we should all be on one side and that's the success of this Game, WE SHOULD WANT WAR OF RIGHTS TO WIN!!!

I believe historical simulators which want to reflect both realism and a chance to win for either side typically choose battles that were a tie, or a very closely fought victory. Antietam of course being tactically inconclusive in favor for the CSA but a strategic win for the Union; so somewhat of a tie. If anything went any different that day it could have easily become a real clear cut victory for either side. It's these coin toss moments that are best emulated in games like this because it allows the developers to get away with balancing both sides regardless of the overarching historical outcome. So that the tactical and personal acumen of the players will determine the outcome in the game.

[John Cooley]

So that the tactical and personal acumen of the players will determine the outcome in the game.
And therein lies the complaint and our recent Test.
NO amount of skill has allowed the Rebs to win, lately, no matter who is playing them.

Again, we know that Balance is a priority for a different day because Mechanics are the purview of Alpha but ...
When it is this unbalanced you lose Testers.
1st TX was a major force a mere 3 months ago and now I am lucky to run into more than 3 at any Event.
We used to skirm them regularly because they could field a unit larger than ours when the Union wouldn't attend.

[TrustyJam]

And therein lies the complaint and our recent Test.
NO amount of skill has allowed the Rebs to win, lately, no matter who is playing them.

Again, we know that Balance is a priority for a different day because Mechanics are the purview of Alpha but ...
When it is this unbalanced you lose Testers.
1st TX was a major force a mere 3 months ago and now I am lucky to run into more than 3 at any Event.
We used to skirm them regularly because they could field a unit larger than ours when the Union wouldn't attend.

The majority of 1st TX stopped being active testers before the implementation of the formation buff system a few weeks ago.

In regards to your remark about losing testers - so be it - alpha testing isn't for everyone (especially not the months if not years of testing we're asking people to endure). You can't rush balance (unless you want us to give everyone identical weapons, have no capture areas, have mirrored maps and identical amounts of morale). Sure you can throw a whole lot of changes in there but if you do that you have no way of knowing what works and what doesn't. The only way forward is to slowly make adjustments based on the latest balance reports. This, while important to get somewhat right, is not something that is having a huge priority for us in the alpha phase however as new game systems being implemented (some in the next update for instance) will continue to change the balance thus making too many man hours spent on it now a waste of development time.

- Trusty

[Numitor]

https://i.imgur.com/FJymsp3.jpg?1

[Goad]

Well, I dont consider this a game. Its actually a simulator and things should be historically accurate and in that, I find far more fun than than having arcady-like elements . The things that should change are the varying degrees of a win or loss like having more than one point for instance. As we all know, its either win or lose. A marginal loss ( while still a loss ) isnt nearly the bitter pill to swallow as a total defeat and perhaps could be salvaged in the follow-up skirmish ( perhaps one day ). The weaponry is a MAJOR element of problems now, hence the 1842. Despite some people saying it isnt a problem , just use better tactics. Well the tactics I have heard at defending Hookers Push is a total recipe for failure as of now. But using incremental use of points could give those tactics more credence.

[Fubar]

https://i.imgur.com/FJymsp3.jpg?1

Order in the Court!!!



Ill have a Cheeseburger!!!

[Dutchconfederate]

I have been in some winning battles with the CSA side. Like stated in a different topic I believe the 1842 lacking to much in accuracy and lacking the distance it can be effective and that makes a big difference in curtain battles.
Must say the CSA side is not always playing it smart. All sitting together in a line not caring about their flanks lot of times being one dimensional.

[sal_tuskin]

dutch you have to stay in lines now or you lose so much morale you lose fast now to my points for the game

1. this isnt real life so maybe give the csa sharps rifles where the union gets them hell just try it, if you want real life i sure there is a war in some middle eastern country you can go play in, games are to have fun not aggravation. I believe the rifles are a big problem with this game with who gets what and when lets just try for testing and see how it goes and leave the well they didnt have them in real life out of it
2. some maps need to be adjusted, morale, where people start and how far they have to run, maybe less cover yea i know they are the real deal well maybe everything doenst have to be true to life

as fubar said and i have said in this post games are to have fun and need to be balanced screw the real life shit we deal with that every day make changes for games sake not real life
also 1tx seems to have left because they didnt like the direction the game was going and i maybe wrong here and Trusty without alpha tests you cant fix anything so be careful what you wish for a large part of your alpha test already left please make changes for the games sake

and Bravesquat please let the big boys talk children need to be seen and not heard when we see you playing the game maybe you can come talk sorry trusty i just had too

[Dutchconfederate]

Like stated you don't have to be one dimensional.. You can make more then one line. This is a game with a realistic feel to it that means the environment weapons and uniforms etc. Rest you can fill in yourself use modern tactics or of the era. Depends on your flavour. Each company is different that way.

[sal_tuskin]

dutch with the morale system they way it is the csa has to play one dimensional cause we have so many less tickets you cant afford to die by yourself off alone or with just a few others
also trusty what you are saying now no one should bother to play the csa side till the next patch cause it would take to much of the dev time to make it fair umm i dont think what will go over to well on the csa side we need help maybe give the csa more morale than the union for now till the next patch that cant take to long now could it

[Dutchconfederate]

You got 40 guys max on each side and you are telling me you can only get one line going.. no way.

[sal_tuskin]

well dutch doesnt seem you play much there is never 40 people per side so that argument goes out the window and that is another problem not enough people testing the csa side and i wonder why and right now the csa could have the navy seals playing for them in term of tactics and shooting ability and the union would till win no matter what, tactics dont mean anything when you cant deloy them come play the csa side tonite we will be on the union and get the csa organized and see how well you do against us not trying to argumentative but it seems you dont play the new game as it is now

[Saris]

The majority of 1st TX stopped being active testers before the implementation of the formation buff system a few weeks ago.

In regards to your remark about losing testers - so be it - alpha testing isn't for everyone (especially not the months if not years of testing we're asking people to endure). You can't rush balance (unless you want us to give everyone identical weapons, have no capture areas, have mirrored maps and identical amounts of morale). Sure you can throw a whole lot of changes in there but if you do that you have no way of knowing what works and what doesn't. The only way forward is to slowly make adjustments based on the latest balance reports. This, while important to get somewhat right, is not something that is having a huge priority for us in the alpha phase however as new game systems being implemented (some in the next update for instance) will continue to change the balance thus making too many man hours spent on it now a waste of development time.

- Trusty

We still played after the implementation of the formation buff system but that and the lack of newer content that we didnt want to get burnt out of a game that is not fully completed. We will be back.

[Numitor]

[...]and that is another problem not enough people testing the csa side[...]

I don't know if I'm missing something but from my experience the teams are almost always close to being even on numbers.

And... damn is that one sentence? ;) - talking about the entire post ofc

[Dutchconfederate]

well dutch doesnt seem you play much there is never 40 people per side so that argument goes out the window and that is another problem not enough people testing the csa side and i wonder why and right now the csa could have the navy seals playing for them in term of tactics and shooting ability and the union would till win no matter what tactics dont mean anything when you cant deloy them come play the csa side tonite we will be on the union and get the csa organized and see how well you do against us not trying to argumentative but it seems you dont play the new game as it is now

Your reading skills are as bad as your writing skills. And it shows your character when you assume things about others the way you do.
The problem is that 1842 rifle not THE rifle but the in-game version of it. Besides that I have seen full servers or almost full servers, enough people on a server where there is no need to form one big line. Guess I do play the game enough to see these filled up servers. :cool:

[sal_tuskin]

we need more than 20-40 playing we need full servers and we dont have it, i never side the sides werent = just not 40 per side
last nite after we beat them 5 times in a row the whole csa team quit went from 20-25 to like 5 and i dont blame them we were them 2 weeks ago and it isnt fun seem there will not be much change to this till the next major patch according to trusty they dont want to divert dev resources to the current problem opening maybe in week or 2 the patch will fix hope so cause the csa is going to be in for a very long 2 weeks or when every the next patch is
we dont need to test the csa anymore to see how broken it is now we are just having fun

dutch i what to know what game you play in the past 2 weeks i have seen exactly one time there were 80 people on the server i am on every nite for 3-6 hrs watch who is playing unless during the day there is a magical appearance of players i dont i want see a screen shot of a full server please post one in the next few days i would like to see
i know how the 1842 fires i have shot replics of it or at least non rifled muskets and they way more accurate than this game portrays and i have been saying that for the last 4 months and no one seems to care

and dutch we will be on tonite get your csa guys on since seem to know when there are lot are on and come fight us we will be on the union side

[TrustyJam]

we need more than 20-40 playing we need full servers and we dont have it, i never side the sides werent = just not 40 per side
last nite after we beat them 5 times in a row the whole csa team quit went from 20-25 to like 5 and i dont blame them we were them 2 weeks ago and it isnt fun seem there will not be much change to this till the next major patch according to trusty they dont want to divert dev resources to the current problem opening maybe in week or 2 the patch will fix hope so cause the csa is going to be in for a very long 2 weeks or when every the next patch is
we dont need to test the csa anymore to see how broken it is now we are just having fun

I said next patch - not next major patch. With our patch release schedule demonstrated the past one and a half years I would very much doubt we are talking 2 weeks before its deployment.

There are other things to test than balance - that is primarily a focus later on in development cycles (beta, early access). Crashing and submitting error reports, game systems such as the formation buff system, animation glitches, server performance (which has been a primary focus for us for the last long while and will continue to be so in the future), etc. etc.

If you do not want to help test due to balance there's nothing I can do about that. Thank you for the time you have tested and not just looked at the alpha as entertainment though. Hope you come back and help us out in the future again. :)

- Trusty

[sal_tuskin]

if you dont play games for entertainment then why play them i have a real life i dont need one here, i have reported and summited crash reports, told you about unbalanced systems in the game just what an alpha tester is supposed to do
no i am not going anywhere i want to see how this game plays out i love the civil war and love guns so what is there not to like
people today have very short attention spans and once you lose them they are gone maybe try to make minor adjustments at a time and only one at a time lot easier to track some developers say
we understand that all systems are in place so my question is how do you test the systems you put in place if they depend on the systems you have to add later kind of hard to test that way i think but thats how you do so we have to live with the unbalance till you add the other systems

thanks for the reply at least you reply to us and have an open forum alot of games dont and they fail so, you are doing alot right maybe not so much change at once i think is what we are asking for and it was nice to kill you a few time last nite when you were on the csa side hope to see you in game more

what really gets in my crawl is when the forum warriors who hardly ever play the game seen to think they know what is best hell i see you in game more than 3/4 of the people on the forums

[Leifr]

The sky is falling.

Patience in all things, you shall all be rewarded justly for the investment of time and energy.

[sal_tuskin]

patience is a virtue dont believe in virtues ;) just kiddng just not much fun playing csa right now

[Redleader]

I can remember before the morale system the Union complaining that the CSA were OP.... clearly this see-sawing of balance needs to find its equilibrium.
I played briefly over the weekend and found all games lost to the Union, despite some great CSA team play.
Sunday, we won all our matches playing as Union, and the brave CSA was not lacking trying.


What is there to say. Right now the Union has a very easy time on most maps. I also think that the capture points on certain maps like Hooker's Push or Pry Ford aren't particularly grateful for the CSA as they are simply sat in a field with no real cover while the Union can just blast away at them from distance while enjoying good cover.
Edit: That and the fact that the Union usually has the better weapons makes for a rather one sided experience.
Certain points could be looked into, most of us have strategic experience and know how we can make the terrain a strategic advantage, however if the defence of a flag is in the open while the enemy shoot from cover ... hello Turkey shooting :)
And yes I played a map in my fancy Union uniform shooting a 'Sharps' and it felt more comfortable ... usually a blind granny can shoot better then me -> But I shot a running 'confed' from more then 70 yards !


I honestly don't see anything wrong with the weaponry, the Confederates had to make due with what they had, meaning that they had to use older guns compared to the north. Also the Confederates were fighting a force that was double their number and the federals did not even field their whole force. The confederates had to use what terrain they had to even out the fighting.
If people would make a game where one side drives the Sherman tank and the others have Tiger I's ... sure that would be historicalaccurate in a way, fun ... is another thing.
Some battles a good allied team would win of strategy, luck and still, but the odds would be against them (hey you might get into a firefly, but that would make you primary target).


I am so tired of everyone bringing up the Historical accuracy. Yes, we know the confeds lost the war, however the Nazis also lost and there are plenty of games out there that are balanced enough so that they can win. Something's should be as historically accurate as possible(Maps, uniform detail, weapon detail...) but something's cant be because this is a Game.
Like stated above, some will praise the historic accuracy and prefer the genuine feel, others want a balanced game (look at BF1, that isn't exactly a true installment of WWI in case of tactics and weapons)


The weaponry is a MAJOR element of problems now, hence the 1842. Despite some people saying it isnt a problem , just use better tactics. Well the tactics I have heard at defending Hookers Push is a total recipe for failure as of now. But using incremental use of points could give those tactics more credence.
You can maybe toy around when having 'older' (maybe less effective) weapons to give more 'tickets/morale' on certain maps (also depend on the actual map).



Must say the CSA side is not always playing it smart. All sitting together in a line not caring about their flanks lot of times being one dimensional.
Some in my regiment believe using scouts is a risk (getting killed alone costs precious tickets/morale), also sharpshooters or skirmisher are currently not favored as a viable tactic.
Sure we adapted a more modern tactic in by using a 360° F.O.V. line where some look at the sides and some at the back (officers are also on the lookout, but ... they got other stuff to do).
But I get the devs they want staying in formation being an advantage (mean we don't want 40 against 40 running around like chickens with a poking stick).


We will be back.
Nice to hear, we are looking forward to it :)


I don't know if I'm missing something but from my experience the teams are almost always close to being even on numbers.

Well luckily you can't really have unbalanced numbers (prevent the so called winning team joiners), if a faction has more players -> then you can only join the other faction.

[Dether]

the problem with the balance at the time is not in itself the lack of fun... the lack of fun comes from the problematic balance, because the game will end so quickly that sometimes the opposing side (confed at the moment) does not have time to play. this concerns me, not because of fun, but I do not see how the devs can get an accurate picture if the matches last only a few minutes. I have tried to bring this up before, but folks continue to make the balance problem much LESS than it is.
we all know (or at least I do) that balance is some thing that will be taken care of later and I accept that and expect it, but at this time something needs to be done or you will only have a couple of minute skirms as long as the II Corps plays as Fed. when they play as Confed the matches last longer, but they do not like loosing every match no matter how hard and well they fight. I have said it and those are the facts.

[DrumThumpinMonkey]

I don't know if this has been discussed anywhere before, if it has sorry for a repost. What if there was a way to gain moral back? Take and hold key points on the field not just one central point. Repel and enemy charge, kill an officer or flag bearer, or having a successful charge that breaks the enemy line. Things like this would actually lower an armies moral drastically, and raise the moral of the opposing force. Just a thought to try and balance the game without venturing to far out of the realm of historical accuracy. Just a though.

[Saris]

I don't know if this has been discussed anywhere before, if it has sorry for a repost. What if there was a way to gain moral back? Take and hold key points on the field not just one central point. Repel and enemy charge, kill an officer or flag bearer, or having a successful charge that breaks the enemy line. Things like this would actually lower an armies moral drastically, and raise the moral of the opposing force. Just a thought to try and balance the game without venturing to far out of the realm of historical accuracy. Just a though.


Defeating an enemy line/lowering their morale, receiving reinforcements, flag being picked back up(when flag mechanics are implemented), officer coming in to lead, taking a point, forming a line in formation, and etc.

I suggested it here.

[DrumThumpinMonkey]

I see..hence the disclaimer before I post..lol

[Goad]

Quote Originally Posted by Goad View Post
The weaponry is a MAJOR element of problems now, hence the 1842. Despite some people saying it isnt a problem , just use better tactics. Well the tactics I have heard at defending Hookers Push is a total recipe for failure as of now. But using incremental use of points could give those tactics more credence.
You can maybe toy around when having 'older' (maybe less effective) weapons to give more 'tickets/morale' on certain maps (also depend on the actual map).


I just want the 1842 to do its historical/realistic capability. As of now, its very far from it. Those two CSA Units in Hookers Push Skirmish wasnt even there at that exact time. It was all Georgia troops. As of now its nothing but a hypothetical what if skirmish. Give us the Georgia troops and then we can see about that.

[John Cooley]

Again, we understand it is Alpha and skirms are mini testing versions of the larger map.
Very little is as it will become eventually so tactics will keep evolving.
But when we have 5,298 people available to test the game and we can barely fill 1 server at peak times there is a problem and we see a major part of it being a recent shift in balance.

To answer the OP ... we are loving being Union.
It is a cake walk and our recent videos have had great titles like ...
Union Tastes their own Medicine
Saturday Slaughter ... yet again
Union Unit Rage Quits

Not sure how much is getting tested in these "Few Minute Fights" but since that doesn't seem that important we will keep going Union and laughing our asses off. It is entertaining, if nothing else.

[Dether]

Again, we understand it is Alpha and skirms are mini testing versions of the larger map.
Very little is as it will become eventually so tactics will keep evolving.
But when we have 5,298 people available to test the game and we can barely fill 1 server at peak times there is a problem and we see a major part of it being a recent shift in balance.

To answer the OP ... we are loving being Union.
It is a cake walk and our recent videos have had great titles like ...
Union Tastes their own Medicine
Saturday Slaughter ... yet again
Union Unit Rage Quits

Not sure how much is getting tested in these "Few Minute Fights" but since that doesn't seem that important we will keep going Union and laughing our asses off. It is entertaining, if nothing else.

thanks Cooley, at least you understand my problem here.. and I would hope the devs would too..
yes .. fed is a cake walk, even when we are just screwing around.. and of course I will go along with the Corps in this plan.

but I want to explain.. I do understand phases, and I know the balance will come,, I know things are planned for and will make many changes,,, just at this moment I do not see how any TRUE testing can be done with such short skirms. perhaps it is very different when UK play.. but still this would not be fair if they ever played at OUR time.. so the whole spectrum should be looked at and not the abilities of those playing ...meaning, don't base your game on folks that think they know what they are doing but don't... just because someone posts a lot does not mean they have a clue when the crap hits the fan... many do not have a lot of hours in REAL GAME.. (not just standing around with a few folks but actually in line combat).. be cool devs.. and use good sense.

[Hienzman]

Again, we understand it is Alpha and skirms are mini testing versions of the larger map.
Very little is as it will become eventually so tactics will keep evolving.
But when we have 5,298 people available to test the game and we can barely fill 1 server at peak times there is a problem and we see a major part of it being a recent shift in balance.

To answer the OP ... we are loving being Union.
It is a cake walk and our recent videos have had great titles like ...
Union Tastes their own Medicine
Saturday Slaughter ... yet again
Union Unit Rage Quits

Not sure how much is getting tested in these "Few Minute Fights" but since that doesn't seem that important we will keep going Union and laughing our asses off. It is entertaining, if nothing else.

I feel like everyone at this point understands the point we have been stressing. That being the lack of balance, when it comes to in game in my opinion Union is easier to play. However I chose Confederate to play Confederate and I've played Union with you guys the past few events to prove our point. I'm sure the Union players feel the same way, they want to play union. I find it unfair for us to continue to play Union forcing the actual Union to play CSA. In my opinion we should not be proud of causing union rage quits especially those fueled by lack of open Union slots. The Union players did not cause the balance issue and in no way should be punished for it.

[John Cooley]

I am glad you feel they understand but, sadly, it is not the case.
We get messages and read posts that clearly illustrate their continued denial of an imbalance OR not caring that the imbalance makes it no fun to play as a Confederate.

Read my Sig ... do you honestly think ANY of us want to be Union?
It makes our skin crawl!

We have three options ...
- Continue to be punching bags and play Confederate
- Play Union and slaughter our foes without any challenge
- Stop Testing

We dislike all these options but certainly invite everyone to choose a path for themselves.
We chose the second one because we refuse to be bullied into the first OR give up on a potentially great game by taking the third.

[Hienzman]

I am glad you feel they understand but, sadly, it is not the case.
We get messages and read posts that clearly illustrate their continued denial of an imbalance OR not caring that the imbalance makes it no fun to play as a Confederate.

Read my Sig ... do you honestly think ANY of us want to be Union?
It makes our skin crawl!

We have three options ...
- Continue to be punching bags and play Confederate
- Play Union and slaughter our foes without any challenge
- Stop Testing

We dislike all these options but certainly invite everyone to choose a path for themselves.
We chose the second one because we refuse to be bullied into the first OR give up on a potentially great game by taking the third.

I understand that there are still those who refuse to see the reality of the situation I just find what we are doing is unfair to those who do. How ever I will fall in line with you boys and continue to wear the blue untill you decide otherwise.

[Numitor]

I am glad you feel they understand but, sadly, it is not the case.
We get messages and read posts that clearly illustrate their continued denial of an imbalance OR not caring that the imbalance makes it no fun to play as a Confederate.

Read my Sig ... do you honestly think ANY of us want to be Union?
It makes our skin crawl!

We have three options ...
- Continue to be punching bags and play Confederate
- Play Union and slaughter our foes without any challenge
- Stop Testing

We dislike all these options but certainly invite everyone to choose a path for themselves.
We chose the second one because we refuse to be bullied into the first OR give up on a potentially great game by taking the third.

Not quite sure where you see people denying imbalance (apart from 1 or 2 who were going on about specifics like weaponry and ticket numbers)
Trusty and many others on this thread have agreed that there is an imbalance.
Harping on about it isn't gonna make the situation any better, you are just beating a dead horse.
But please do provide proof that there is a significant number of people who don't think that there is imbalance.

And who is trying to "bully" you in into playing Confederates?

[TrustyJam]

Yes, no one is denying balance issues (hence why we wrote that they would be off in the patch notes of the patch that introduced the formation buff system).

A thing to keep in mind regarding balance tests: In order for us to be able to gain proper balance results we also need to remember that the teams need to be as identical as possible. If one team consists of 30 guys used to playing together and all sitting on teamspeak against another team of 30 randoms with no communication or worked out plan the former team should always win.

- Trusty

[Timo420]

I have been silent the past few days and really enjoyed this forum thread more than most thing in my live it was especially fun yesterday when, I smoked a jo*nt like a proper Dutch fellow and promtly started reading, now also I must say that the testing has been very fun especially on the saturday night, I even had to reschedule my late night w*nking sessions but it proved to be well worth it as it proved to be very fun to scream "Charlie's in the trees!!" while being on Westwoods noticing the point had been captured 5 seconds later, then I loaded in next map and f*ck me sideways before I could have spawned in on the next map those those bluebellies captured it again. Now this continued for like 20 rounds the next 30 minutes, but then it dawned on me, as the blessed virgin Mary appeared for me (I should really stop using certain drugs) she told me these Yanks are pulling your c*ck. So all I really want to say is that the testing you have been conducting is f*cking useless as we played 20 rounds and they where all over before half of the rebel team could spawn in, now I do fully propose testing to balance the game but frankly all I need to say is that the way you are doing it is useless as all you have been showing us is well you are really great at capping points, you don't really prove the Union is overpowered the exact same tactics would work on the Confederate when you are attacking and 2nd you fellas awfully remind me of the bullies that you say you are fighting, you are telling the devs to "Fix the game or we will continue being the Union and slaughter the CSA scrubs.". Now this is the wrong message to send as frankly it does more damage to the game than having and unbalanced CSA side your marathon like tactics in winning rounds well scares of new people as who woud want to play a game where when you spawn in, you are already loading in the next bl**dy map. I wish you all well on the perfect day. Yours truly the silent 6th!!!

[Scythian PJ]

While I haven't played all that much in the past few weeks, I do have a few thoughts about all of this. So, where to start?

First of all: There is absolutely nothing wrong with playing Union. I get that we're all very dedicated to our chosen factions, either through choice or perceived heritage, but at the end of the day; this is a game. We're not actually beating up Rebs or Yanks on the field of battle. As a matter of fact, I quite enjoy playing Union every now and then, just to see what it's like to be on the other side of that battlefield. If you're really good at defending as CSA on Burnside Bridge, why not check out the Union side? It can really humble you.

The threats of "We're gonna stop playing, you guys!" is about as immature as it gets. We're all here to have fun, aren't we? Provide feedback where necessary, and stop being so overtly hostile when you give it to the devs. They're people too, and I doubt they want to get shat on for finetuning something they've clearly put a lot of love and effort into. Consider tact and some respect when giving feedback. They ain't your punching bag.
Do I agree with all the balancing decisions the devs made? Nope. Is that normal? Yes. What did I do? I didn't take to the forums with my entire company to brigade against the devs, essentially repeating the same things that have been repeated in the Teamspeak echo chambers and circlejerks (looking at you, 2nd Brigade).

I'm straying from my main thought, however. All you need to do is have an open mind when it comes to the changes. One of the biggest changes I absolutely hated, was the changing of the melee system. Over time, I learned to deal with the fact that it changed. I've grown to actually like the system now.

But the new ticket system? No. I love long, drawn out and epic battles. We rarely get those anymore.

[Sir_Squiggles]

Its not even worth my time anymore to trigger people on the forums like yourselves over your petty opinions. Because no matter what is done to have a mature discussion on solutions and ideas to maybe address the problems and help test for the devs so they can see what is going on. We have people who come on and think their tactics are superior yet what works works. A lot of you have yet to realize that there was a reason tactics in the civil war changed so much meanwhile I will continue to sip my Southern Sweet Tea as you all continue to tell others they are not good tacticians. Adding content and giving feedback is what the forums is meant for. If you like longer games its important to tell the devs. If you don't want people rushing the point its important to tell the devs. If you want hello kitty island adventure skin packs for your weapons its important to tell the devs. Otherwise next time you want to throw some criticism (which you have no room to) at a unit or company bring something to the table that is more than oooohh they are bad tactical peoples and my brain cant figure out how to stop them so i need the devs to do it so i will complain about them. How about "just spitballing here" getting creative and finding a way to avoid causing backlash and just post a topic on hey I feel the game needs to be like this because of xyz happening. Also to dear BJ, you've not been around is correct a lot of the 6th Alabama hasn't or maybe its just ghosts on the company rosters. But that's besides your points thank for your opinions they are so valuable I don't know where we would be without your contribution of 67 hrs on the game. We will continue to show up and play whoever wants to step in our sights regardless of affiliation. I would also like to add a thank you to the devs for hearing voices no one on our side is trying to "bully" as timo phrased it, and I think the new update with adding a skirmish feature is a great step in the right direction to bring back tactics for the confederate forces!

[Scythian PJ]

Also to dear BJ, you've not been around is correct a lot of the 6th Alabama hasn't or maybe its just ghosts on the company rosters. But that's besides your points thank for your opinions they are so valuable I don't know where we would be without your contribution of 67 hrs on the game.


7526

[Sir_Squiggles]

7526

Truth does hurt sometimes

[Numitor]

Adding content and giving feedback is what the forums is meant for.


Also to dear BJ, you've not been around is correct a lot of the 6th Alabama hasn't or maybe its just ghosts on the company rosters. But that's besides your points thank for your opinions they are so valuable I don't know where we would be without your contribution of 67 hrs on the game.

Nice. ;)

[Sir_Squiggles]

Nice. ;)

No one likes it when it comes around back to them examples are needed.

[Redleader]

I even had to reschedule my late night w*nking sessions

A worthy sacrifice it is ...



.... and stop being so overtly hostile when you give it to the devs. They're people too
.

Are we sure ? They could be 'Cylons', some form of 'AI' or 'extraterrestrial' for all we know ... (also got a Voight-Kampff machine hooked up just in case)
Hostile ? ... well they showed up as Union and invaded our beloved South ! -> They even shot at me ... the nerve !!!!



The threats of "We're gonna stop playing, you guys!" is about as immature as it gets.

Threats is a bit far stretched, if you find a horse head in your bed or a dead fish in a newspaper at your door ... that's a threat :)



Do I agree with all the balancing decisions the devs made? Nope. Is that normal? Yes. What did I do?

Get court martialed by your peers ?



I didn't take to the forums with my entire company to brigade against the devs, essentially repeating the same things that have been repeated in the Teamspeak echo chambers and circlejerks (looking at you, 2nd Brigade).
.

Entire ? Think more of 2/3 got lost in the way here, if we only had a device that would give us directions and tell us our position ... that would be a wondress machine.
-> looking at you, 2nd Brigade -> okay ... you made it personal !!! You will hear from my sollicitor !! My minister !!! My senator !!! My wife, kid and three cats

Look we all hope things normalise (it's been a hefty week) and that new people find their way to WoR and enjoy the game, devs get some good errorreports (don't forget to send them in : https://www.warofrights.com/errorreporter) and there is world peace ! (okay except for another Rambo movie)

And honestly me playing the Union, I already look handsome ... and in that red/blue uniform -> I look like royalty. (women really dig it, when are women being implemented ?)

[CommissarAj]

Its not even worth my time anymore to trigger people on the forums like yourselves over your petty opinions. Because no matter what is done to have a mature discussion on solutions and ideas to maybe address the problems and help test for the devs so they can see what is going on.
If petty peoples opinions didn't matter why are you on the forums then? I've noticed you seem to just talk crap that is unrelated to the point of the post with the BJ or bravesquat, and you attack them or their companies for no reason. Like you add nothing to the conversation, but trying to start fights to only hide behind the devs when they say to stop. Like if you could I don't know kindly jump in a lake you pooft.

[Sir_Squiggles]

If petty peoples opinions didn't matter why are you on the forums then? I've noticed you seem to just talk crap that is unrelated to the point of the post with the BJ or bravesquat, and you attack them or their companies for no reason. Like you add nothing to the conversation, but trying to start fights to only hide behind the devs when they say to stop. Like if you could I don't know kindly jump in a lake you pooft.

Because I love getting responses from people like you :), here recently no one wanted to get triggered but I am in love that you have!

[CommissarAj]

Because I love getting responses from people like you :), here recently no one wanted to get triggered but I am in love that you have!
Well arguing online is my favorite pastime although you being mentally deficient I won't be so harsh.

[Sir_Squiggles]

Well arguing online is my favorite pastime although you being mentally deficient I won't be so harsh.

Hahah whatever you've got send it my way please do white knight of the north. You've had 2 post both on the forums to be towards me and its got me such an erection. <3

[CommissarAj]

Hahah whatever you've got send it my way please do white knight of the north. You've had 2 post both on the forums to be towards me and its got me such an erection. <3

I mean I called you a pooft for a reason.

[Sir_Squiggles]

I mean I called you a pooft for a reason.

Because that's all you've got.

[Bravescot]

So the main issue the CSA has from reading through the reliant posts are: They don't like the match up of Springfield '42 vs Sharps Rifle and they believe that currently the ticket system has placed the CSA at too strong a disadvantage. I don't disagree with the issue at hand. I do disagree with how you've chosen to voice your discontent.

Would it not be better to simply play on with the current format to help the devs collect as much vital data as they can to fix the issues. Instead you rush off to the Union so you can, for all intensest and purposes, satisfy your inability to cope maturely with loss for the time being. I'm sorry but that is how it is coming across. Your way of running around going "we're going to stop play" is really unwanted and an immature and inappropriate response.

By all means leave if this is how you are going to act at one minor in balanced update. Your money will be put to good use fixing the issue whilst the rest of us wait patiently and understandingly. If you're not going to leave then learn a better and more fitting way to voice your issues and qualms with the devs.

[Sir_Squiggles]

I mean I called you a pooft for a reason.

7528

[MN_for_Life]

7527 When your only source of self validation is spicy comments on a dysfunctional forum. ROAR

[sal_tuskin]

commisarAJ just who are you again never seen you in a game yet and here you are bitching about being petty well play the game and maybe we will think more of you
all where the hell is my screen shots of a full 80 person i am still waiting cause i think someone got this game confused with another game that starts with a H

again Bravesquat please play the game some before you come on here and make ideas all you seem to do is want to incite people and toll post oh yea i see a bridge for you to hide under
sorry but you only seem to come out when we trying to have a serious discussion i dont recall seeing you much in game hell i even see A P HILL play now so please come join use and see

[Sir_Squiggles]

What makes it even better is now I know who you are :) "goodshots" what are you like 11??? I heard your voice in game when you were screaming lots of profanity as my revolver hammer fell.

[John Cooley]

Yet again, when a point can not be defended adequately, another thread degenerates into name calling.
This thread is about how do we like playing Union and then expanded into why are we doing it.
That has been established ... hate doing it but the alternatives are even less palatable.

Arguing furthers the game not one bit and appears to entrench opinions not change them.
That being said I will address the two questions asked ...
- The Blue Bulllies are obvious if you have been here any length of time or wish to do a bit of research on many of the locked threads.
- Nobody has ever threatened to quit testing, that I can recall.
It has been mentioned as an option that nobody wants to do.
This was clearly stated a mere ONE page ago ...

We chose the second one because we refuse to be bullied into the first OR give up on a potentially great game by taking the third.
I am not sure how our "refusal to quit testing" can be construed as a "threat to quit testing" but I have long since given up on fathoming the inner workings of the minds of Forum Warriors.

I have to agree completely that little is gained by these Speed Skirms and hereby amend our previous offer ...
Let us know when you want to meet in battle and we will spawn in as Union and you as Confederates.
We will wait at spawn until you tell us you are ready to defend yourselves.
Then we will attack and prove that it isn't the usual Union tactic of bum rushing the spawn, that we have emulated as the New Southern Yankee Army, that is the difference maker.
Let us know any other parameters that you might wish added, short of tossing our weapons down and charging, and we will see what we can do to make your stay at Antietam more pleasant.

[MN_for_Life]

Hibachi Fried Rice.

Chop the onion.
Heat vegetable oil on medium high in large skillet or wok (use the skillet or wok you cooked the chicken in earlier).
Add the onion and sauté.
Sauté onion for 3-4 minutes or until almost tender enough to eat.
Add the bean sprouts.
Sauté for 1-2 minutes.
Move the vegetables to the side of the pan.
Add the eggs, lightly scramble as you add them to the skillet.
Once scrambled add the rice and butter.
Cook for 5 minutes, stirring frequently.
Add the soy sauce and cook an additional minute.

[CommissarAj]

7528

Honestly I just find it funny an old man is arguing with me on the forums. I mean waste precious time you have left on me please. Knowing the sands of time slowly just passing for as you type responses gives me great joy. The day you are lowered in your grave will be sad for no one, because no one will probably remember you.

Also sal_tuskin i have 120 hours in game most of the with the name commissaraj I mostly play eu events. I only recently changed my name as a joke. So it shows how ignorant you are trying to make a point. I don't where in the "Proud South" you are, but honestly your education is horrible. This game starts with a W for War, but you seem slightly for mentally deficient Sir Squiggles. Enjoy your evening of sitting in your ts virtually stroking your epeens with each other though.

[Sir_Squiggles]

Honestly I just find it funny an old man is arguing with me on the forums. I mean waste precious time you have left on me please. Knowing the sands of time slowly just passing for as you type responses gives me great joy. The day you are lowered in your grave will be sad for no one, because no one will probably remember you.

Also sal_tuskin i have 120 hours in game most of the with the name commissaraj I mostly play eu events. I only recently changed my name as a joke. So it shows how ignorant you are trying to make a point. I don't where in the "Proud South" you are, but honestly your education is horrible. This game starts with a W for War, but you seem slightly for mentally deficient Sir Squiggles. Enjoy your evening of sitting in your ts virtually stroking your epeens with each other though.

4 post on the forums xD just to try and roast I love it. And I really didn't know 20 was old I guess you are so much more of a mental giant than I could ever wish to be. I think we all have something important to learn from you. :)

[Leifr]

Alas, I return from working on the continent to find this thread degenerating a little too quickly. It's good to know that folk know when to leave their keyboards alone for the betterment of all. Truly there are some brave and noble warriors here. :o

Locking thread.