In a burst of enthusiasm born from boredom at work I started doing some extra development on the combat sim.
So far, I have fixed Dual Rapiers not being able to do a double parry against a double attack, and I have added in the Fatigue rules (which should speed up long combats) as an option on the options panel.
Any other (reasonable) requests?
Do not ask for an AI opponent, as that's still in production and will be ages off, and do not ask for head-to-head play over IP as that's beyond me at the moment (I just don't have the time for something that major). I reserve the right to deny any request :-)
I know some folk asked for a couple of other things once, but I can't find the posts concerned, so if there's something you really want to see in there, this is your chance.
Oh yeah, and no grappling. I'll still thinking through that one.
Brian.
some missile combat might be interesting, though obviously shouldnt be in what appears to be a melee combat sim, my only requests would have been sorcery, or missile, both of which wouldnt be that easy to do, im sure
Quote from: BrianLAny other (reasonable) requests?
Brian.
Would it be too much to ask to actually get most of the melee weapons in there?
I you could design it so that when one player sends a command it writes to standard out then waits for a return message of the other guys command in standard in, I could probably write a program that passes that info over the web.
Now, I have no idea about how difficult it would be to do anything like this, but I'll give it a shot anyway.
The dice modifiers when hitting different locations. It makes tactics, aiming and armor so much more interesting.
Sometimes you have a Reflex of 5 and a profiency of 6 but a CP of 2 at the end of a fight. Perhaps a reset button that re-calculates the CP. Just adding together the Ref and Prof. That wouldn't take away any changes you might want to keep, right?
Perhaps skills like Style Analysis and Body Language?
Quotesome missile combat might be interesting, though obviously shouldnt be in what appears to be a melee combat sim, my only requests would have been sorcery, or missile, both of which wouldnt be that easy to do, im sure
Well, in TROS anyone trying to do missile combat in melee is pretty much dead, same for sorcery if you're not well prepared. I don't think I'll tackle those in the melee sim :-)
QuoteWould it be too much to ask to actually get most of the melee weapons in there?
What version of the combat sim are you using? You do know that V2 (the one that is currently on the webpage etc) has 25 weapons in there, right? I stopped adding weapons when I got to the point where the only ones left were basically just copies of other ones I had already added, but if there are any specific weapons that you just can't live without, I can put them in.
QuoteI you could design it so that when one player sends a command it writes to standard out then waits for a return message of the other guys command in standard in, I could probably write a program that passes that info over the web.
That's the time consuming bit :-) Actually sending a message to an IP address or waiting for one is the easy part. I will do this at some point, but not for a while.
QuoteThe dice modifiers when hitting different locations. It makes tactics, aiming and armor so much more interesting.
Yeah, that's a good idea, and shouldn't be too hard to implement. I'll work on that. I may put it in as an option.
QuoteSometimes you have a Reflex of 5 and a profiency of 6 but a CP of 2 at the end of a fight. Perhaps a reset button that re-calculates the CP. Just adding together the Ref and Prof. That wouldn't take away any changes you might want to keep, right?
Fair call, except it means adding an extra button. I'll see if I can think of somewhere to put that.
QuotePerhaps skills like Style Analysis and Body Language?
I decided early on not to mess about with putting skills in there (ditto gifts like accuracy), but I'll think about it.
Thanks for the ideas guys. Keep them coming.
Brian.
well you asked for what we'd like...lol, thats about all i could think of that was missing...lol
Update update:
Fatigue and hit location modifiers have been added. That rapier fix has been done. Also, at the end of a battle, the program automatically refreshes each players current CP. If their other stats have changed at all, you'll still have to reload them (lower health due to bleeding, etc) but if CP is the only thing that has changed, it's now refreshed and you'll be able to just click FIGHT again.
As an aside, if you never thought EN was really all that important, you'll change your mind when you battle with the fatigue rules. It adds a whole new element to combat. Fast weak guy versus a Max Steel type? Just full Evade for a while until Max exhausts himself and then he's meat :-)
Unless someone suggests anything else they want changed/added, and unless I come up with any new changes, I'll send the new version (2.1) to Jake after this weekend.
Brian.
The only other thing I'vehad a problem with Brian is when one guy tosses and the second opts not to defend but attack instead the tosse(?) doesn't ever get any successes. No matter how many dice he puts into it.
Aaron.
Quote from: AaronThe only other thing I'vehad a problem with Brian is when one guy tosses and the second opts not to defend but attack instead the tosse(?) doesn't ever get any successes. No matter how many dice he puts into it.
Aaron.
Hmm.. you're right. In fact, it doesn't look like it even rolls dice for him. Thanks, I'll look into that.
Serves him right for being a tosser anyway. :-)
Actually, that may be a kiwi joke that you guys wont get. Down here, "tosser" is a derogatory term for someone that suggests they masturbate a lot, kind of like calling someone a wanker I guess, but it's more mild and not really that offensive.
Brian.
OK, I have fixed the "toss when defender attacks" bug. If the tosser goes second in the resulting simultaneous attack, it just removes the dice at the start of the next exchange, as always. If the tosser goes first, it reduces the other guys die pool immediately for his sim attack, possibly reducing the dice he has put into that attack (but it comes off available die pool before attack pool, as always).
Either way, if I toss and you respond by attacking, I'm probably dead and you've risked almost nothing. Nasty.
Hey Jake, remember how you errata'ed Beat to reduce die pool by double the successes since it used to be just the successes and this wasn't good enough? Was this fix supposed to be for Toss as well? It would make Toss a more useful attack.
Brian.
Quote from: BrianLQuote from: Aaron"tosser" is a derogatory term
Brian.
I thought the standard kiwi derogatory term was "aussie" (as is Australian) :)
I'm a yank but I lived in Leigh (north of Auckland) for 4 years...
Nice place
NT
Quote from: toliI thought the standard kiwi derogatory term was "aussie" (as is Australian) :)
Only if they *are* Aussies. Calling someone an "aussie" when they're not Australian is crual and unusual punishment.
Brian.
hmm....I think I'll put all CP and Spiritual dice, (Passion Australia, drive Defend Aussies etc etc) into thrusting attack to BrianL's head (my players favorite..Not Brian, the head shot) for that one being Australian myself!! Or maybe we should start on the sheep jokes heh?? haha
As for the fix, sounds good, but I thought the rules said If you win each success in the margin causes him to lose 1 CP on the following exchange.. I didn't think it mattered whether you tossed before your opponent wacked you, or after..Has this been changed somewhere?
Aaron
Quote from: Aaronhmm....I think I'll put all CP and Spiritual dice, (Passion Australia, drive Defend Aussies etc etc) into thrusting attack to BrianL's head (my players favorite..Not Brian, the head shot) for that one being Australian myself!! Or maybe we should start on the sheep jokes heh?? haha
Yeah yeah, New Zealand: where men are men, and sheep get nervous.
Heard them all, my boy. Heard them all.
Quote from: AaronAs for the fix, sounds good, but I thought the rules said If you win each success in the margin causes him to lose 1 CP on the following exchange.. I didn't think it mattered whether you tossed before your opponent wacked you, or after..Has this been changed somewhere?
Well, there's been debate on here as to what consitiutes the "next exchange". Technically, if he's swinging after me, then it's his next exchange, right? Or you could look at it in the strictest sense where he's already declared an attack and so it goes through as normal until the actual next exchange when he loses the dice.
Jake's been pretty neutral on the interpretation, unless I missed his clarification. My view is that if I delay it to the actual next exchange, toss is useless - any time someone does a toss attack I'm totally free to attack him with impunity, who cares who gets initiative, the worse he can do is steal dice after my attack, by which time he's probably/hopefully dead. This way, even if he attacks he may lose attack dice and toss is not so immediately deadly/useless.
Anyway, that's *my* interpretation, so it stays until such time as Jake tells me it's wrong :-)
Brian.
Quote from: BrianLQuote
What version of the combat sim are you using? You do know that V2 (the one that is currently on the webpage etc) has 25 weapons in there, right? I stopped adding weapons when I got to the point where the only ones left were basically just copies of other ones I had already added, but if there are any specific weapons that you just can't live without, I can put them in.
I'm using V2.0
The list of weapons available there (largely for my reference:)
1. Arming Sword
2. Bastard Sword
3. Club
4. Doppelhander
5. Dual Rapiers (I prefer "Case of Rapiers" myself, but...)
6. Flail
7. Footman's Pick
8. Long Spear
9. LongSword
10. Mace
11. Maul
12. Pike
13. Poleaxe
14. Poniard Dagger
15. Quarterstaff
16. Rapier
17. Short Sword
18. Warflail
Eighteen weapons, by my count, leaving a rather large list of omitted weapons.
Eventually, I would like to see EVERYTHING included (as far as melee weapons, at least.)
But, hm.. what CAN'T I live without?
1. Cut & Thrust
Unlike any other weapon -- a medium-length sword almost equally capable at Cutting and Thrusting.
2. Sabre/Scimitar
A Cut & Thrust with an important difference which makes it one of tRoS's most entertaining weapons.
3. Estoc
I've always wanted to use one of these. I'm also somewhat unsure of the mechanics behind it.
4. Greatsword
I know. I know. More or less just a more powerful Longsword...
5. Falchion
One of the best Sword & Shield swords out there. Something sadly lacking in the Combat Simulator.
6. Short Spear
Um. If you have a Long Spear....
7. Short Staff
Enough different from the Quarterstaff that I think it warrants inclusion.
I have many, many ideas, but most of them should wait for later revisions.
Um. What language is the Combat Sim written in, BTW?
Well that's fair enough then. I used the Sim to help get a feel for how the system worked..Thats how I found the prob with Toss. Now I'm playing around with it now and I notice that bind and strike doesnt seem to be taking the success dice away from the opponent before they swing back..Cut and Thrust got 2 success on his bind against Hef who was attacking back with 6. hef still got to roll all his 6 dice and gutted poor Cut and Thrust. Should this work like toss?
Here's another one I just remembered..The defender gets no options when the attacker does a Stop Short..?
Quote from: AaronI notice that bind and strike doesnt seem to be taking the success dice away from the opponent before they swing back..Cut and Thrust got 2 success on his bind against Hef who was attacking back with 6. hef still got to roll all his 6 dice and gutted poor Cut and Thrust. Should this work like toss?
Hmm.. I'll have a look at that. From memory you can't do a B&S on a simultaneous attack, so I'm guessing you're talking about the situation where player A does a B&S and player B responds by attacking instead of defending?
Quote from: AaronHere's another one I just remembered..The defender gets no options when the attacker does a Stop Short..?
RTM. He's not supposed to.
Brian.
Oh I see........ As the defender against a stop short you get no option...No need to change the sim for that one then..Does seem a little unreasonable though...The peasant with the pitchfork stops short on the giant who looses dice cause hes put off? A very silly example but I'm sure you see my point.. It didn't occur to me that you wouldn't get a chance to react as the defenders options arent set for any of the other maneuvers.
Hmmm...thats a very long list of weapons up there..
Has anyone mentioned grappling for the Sim? Maybe not the full rolling around on the ground rules but possible Grappling to trap of Throw?
Quote from: AaronHas anyone mentioned grappling for the Sim? Maybe not the full rolling around on the ground rules but possible Grappling to trap of Throw?
Reading through the rules, it seems that B&S is supposed to remove the dice from the opponent on your next attack, the concept being that you have opened him up so that he'll have a harder time defending against your next attack, not so that he'll be penalised on HIS next attack, so I'm going to leave it as is.
As for grappling, well, that's a whole new kettle of fish and a lot of work, which is why I have not bothered so far. I may or may not, I'll think about it.
Brian.
Quote from: Bob RichterEventually, I would like to see EVERYTHING included (as far as melee weapons, at least.)
But, hm.. what CAN'T I live without?
Grumble. You're talking a lot of work for negligible reward - most of the weapons you list are only fractionally different from others that are in there.
Is anyone else dying to see extra weapons in the combat sim? If I get another vote for yes then I'll add Bob's suggestions, otherwise the weapons selection will stay as it is for now.
And hey, eighteen weapons is still 17 more than you had with the old combat sim... :-)
Quote from: Bob RichterI have many, many ideas, but most of them should wait for later revisions.
Um. What language is the Combat Sim written in, BTW?
There's not a whole lot of point in having suggestions unless you tell me what they are.
Oh, and Delphi, which is visual Pascal, basically.
Brian.
I can live without additional weapons, though they'd be nice. I would like to add my vote for (if it's not too difficult) adding the use of appropriate skills. I say that mainly because I'm unsure of precisely how some are meant to work, and because I know that if I ever manage to actually play TROS, something like Body Language is something I'd use a lot.
Anyway, I would like to say thanks for doing all this work at all! It is much appreciated.
Lucien
I've got an easy one for you to fix Brian...If it hasn't already been noticed. The arming glove Bind and Strike target number is 0.
Aaron.
Quote from: AaronI've got an easy one for you to fix Brian...If it hasn't already been noticed. The arming glove Bind and Strike target number is 0.
Aaron.
You're right, but ony for player 2 :-)
That's what comes of cutting and pasting blocks of code but forgetting to change variable names from "abindstrike" to "bbindstrike"... :-)
Fixed.
Brian.
Good stuff..
I would also like to second Lucien's comment, all the work is much appreciated. I found the original sim excellent for helping me understand the flow of combat so I'm sure the new version will assist even greater.
aaron
Quote from: BrianLQuote from: Bob RichterEventually, I would like to see EVERYTHING included (as far as melee weapons, at least.)
But, hm.. what CAN'T I live without?
Grumble. You're talking a lot of work for negligible reward - most of the weapons you list are only fractionally different from others that are in there.
That's also true of many you DID include. The Scimitar/Sabre, at least. It's a very unique weapon. The Falchion, too. But I *do* want all of them.
Quote from: BrianLQuote from: Bob RichterI have many, many ideas, but most of them should wait for later revisions.
Um. What language is the Combat Sim written in, BTW?
There's not a whole lot of point in having suggestions unless you tell me what they are.
Oh, and Delphi, which is visual Pascal, basically.
Brian.
Suggestions:
1 - Include equipment quality factors
2 - Switch to a primary hand/off hand orientation instead of a weapon/shield orientation (that shows a certain bias.)
I actually forget what most of my ideas are right now.
I'll get back to you on that.
Delphi?
Odd how it looks so much like a VisBASIC program.
Oh well, my training's not in Pascal, so it wouldn't do me any good to beg for your source code anyway. :)
Quote from: BrianL
Grumble. You're talking a lot of work for negligible reward - most of the weapons you list are only fractionally different from others that are in there.
Would it be possible to add an input form so that anyone who wanted could enter the relevant weapons stats and have them populate the database. That way you wouldn't have to do all the fiddly entry stuff.
Y'know, I think Valamir's on the right track. The ability to enter our own weapons, so long as they don't have any really special qualities (beyond +/- bleeding/shock/pain or somesuch) would vastly increase the value of the program. It would allow us to do it so you don't have to, and it would also allow us to try out experimental weapons for balance issues, or to add new weapons entirely that don't exist in the current TRoS book, but which might come out in TFoB or some other supplement.
I'd say, while you're at it, make armor the same way.
PlayerX: "Hey Brian, why don't you add X weapon to the sim, it's my favorite."
Brian: "Why don't YOU add it, and send me your weapon file, so I can use it too?"
Quote1 - Include equipment quality factors
2 - Switch to a primary hand/off hand orientation instead of a weapon/shield orientation (that shows a certain bias.)
1. At this point, that would entail a lot of work, so it's a maybe for the future but don't hold your breath.
2. Left/Right or Weapon/Shield, either is easy to do, but once you go down one path, you're talking a LOT of work to backtrack (and basically, re-code a good 10% of the program, which is well over 20,000 lines of source code at the moment, not to mention all the form changes etc). So, no, basically. And I disagree with your bias comment anyway :-)
QuoteOdd how it looks so much like a VisBASIC program.
Oh well, my training's not in Pascal, so it wouldn't do me any good to beg for your source code anyway. :)
It wouldn't matter if you were a Delphi-god, it
still wouldn't do you any good to beg for my source code.
QuoteWould it be possible to add an input form so that anyone who wanted could enter the relevant weapons stats and have them populate the database. That way you wouldn't have to do all the fiddly entry stuff.
Hmm.. well, no, not really. Due to the actual programatic edits I had to make for many of the weapons because they "break the rules" (so to speak) I have an internalised database instead of an external data file. See previous comments on recoding the entire program (and you're talking a more substantial change here) to understand why this wont happen.
On the other hand, yesterday I added all the extra weapons requested, plus a few more, so you shouldn't have too much to complain about :-)
What it comes down to is, I understand some of the extra things people think would be cool, but you're talking a huge amount of work to implement them, and I'm not being paid for this you know :-) Plus, and this is important too,
my opinion of how the sim should look is a consideration also.
Brian.
Quote from: BrianL
Plus, and this is important too, my opinion of how the sim should look is a consideration also.
Brian.
Of course.
BTW, I'm really looking forward to when you start with the AI opponent, mostly because of the very interesting discussions that will bring on how to fight in TROS...
...You *will* let the rest of us help you with that, won't you?
Quote from: MokkurkalfeI'm really looking forward to when you start with the AI opponent, mostly because of the very interesting discussions that will bring on how to fight in TROS...
...You *will* let the rest of us help you with that, won't you?
Mate, I'm
counting on it. Coding the AI is
bloody hard. Actually, scratch that, the coding is not too bad, it's the algorithm that's a bitch. I may have to think about start off with only allowing a certain character as the AI character, who always has the same stats, armor and weapon configuration, as coding the AI for any combination of stats, armor and weapons/shields/etc is a daunting task.
In other news, I have added Cut & Thrust, Scimitar, Estoc, Greatsword, Falchion, Short Spear, Short Staff, Bill, Halberd, Warhammer, Morning Star, Hand Axe and Spear as usable weapons. That's all the weapons in the book except Lances, which are pretty useless without a big throbbing piece of meat between your legs.
Also as previously mentioned, I've added optional hit location modifiers, optional fatigue rules, plus various bug fixes.
I have been thinking about Grappling, but it's just so different from all other aspects of melee (plus the need for a seperate proficiency and the need to add punching, kicking, et al in there as well, etc etc) that it probably wont be turning up in the combat sim any time soon.
Is there anything else anyone wants before I finalise the build (v2.5) and send it off to Jake?
Brian.
Nah, you've already put in the few things I missed. The quicker I can get it, the better!
Quote from: BrianLQuoteIt wouldn't matter if you were a Delphi-god, it still wouldn't do you any good to beg for my source code.
Thought it might have served to give me a better idea which suggestions to/not to make.
Ah well. Looks like I'm going to have to eventually write my own...
urg.
Quote from: Bob RichterQuote from: BrianLIt wouldn't matter if you were a Delphi-god, it still wouldn't do you any good to beg for my source code.
Thought it might have served to give me a better idea which suggestions to/not to make.
Ah well. Looks like I'm going to have to eventually write my own...
urg.
Lets put it this way...
Do you hand out copies of your source to people you don't know?
For that matter, do you hand out copies of your source to people you DO know?
Didn't think so :-)
Unless I'm contracturally obliged to hand over my source, I never do. Why would I? That's like a chef giving out his recipies for free, or Jake handing out the TROS rulebook in word format.
Brian.
Heh heh heh...
I wont post the whole battle report here because it's pretty long, but essentially, Arming Guy couldn't land a big enough hit on Max Steele to get through his armor and toughness (without opening himself up too much to a lethal counterattack anyway), so he just danced about until fatigue reduced Max's CP to 2 and then stabbed him through the head.
Fatigue rules rock :-)
Ahem. Sorry.
Brian.
Quote from: BrianL
Lets put it this way...
Do you hand out copies of your source to people you don't know?
Yup.
Quote from: BrianL
For that matter, do you hand out copies of your source to people you DO know?
Yup.
Quote from: BrianL
Didn't think so :-)
Then you're wrong. Hundreds of coders do, including myself. Free source is a wonderful thing. And you're probably never going to be paid a dime for this code. Why bother being petty about it? Are you afraid of losing the accolades of tRoS fans all over the world?
Quote from: BrianL
Unless I'm contracturally obliged to hand over my source, I never do. Why would I? That's like a chef giving out his recipies for free, or Jake handing out the TROS rulebook in word format.
Brian.
You already know where that's wrong. You're not getting paid. In fact, without Jake's express permission, it would be illegal for you to get any money out of this project at all. You're doing it simply out of the goodness of your heart, and you KNOW it too. :)
But as I said, I won't bother wasting time begging for your source code. Consider yourself reprimanded.
Ah, but I'm not a proponent of free source, and despite your undertones, it doesn't make me a worse person than you. Also, your dig about the acolades of TROS fans was uncalled for and insulting.
No, I don't make any money off this, but (with luck) Jake does. And then we all win. Would that change if I released my code? Probably not, but why take the risk. Jake gets to "ok" each release before anyone else sees it, but he wouldn't have that option if I released the code, people could make whatever changes they liked, tweaking it so that it better matched their concept of how combat should look, but that changed version might lead others to thinking that that was what TROS combat looked like, potentially affecting sales if those "unauthorised" versions sucked.
And that sums up many of my problems with free source right there.
And no, I have no interest in debating free source with you, so don't bother trying :-)
Brian.
Quote from: BrianLAh, but I'm not a proponent of free source, and despite your undertones, it doesn't make me a worse person than you. Also, your dig about the acolades of TROS fans was uncalled for and insulting.
I see I need to make more free use of smileys. My strange sense of humor has yet to gain enough fame here that it goes without saying that I'm joking when I say something like that.
Nonprofessional cooks share their recipes all the time. Nonprofessional game designers put their text up for free download on the internet. (for that matter, professional writers and game designers can often be caused, with little effort, to make hours-long expositions on their technique.) Nonprofessional Programmers put out their code for the world to see.
If you're not making money, that makes you an amateur, regardless of how much money you make in other, similar persuits. It seems you're just not used to the mentality of an amateur, yet.
Quote from: BrianL
No, I don't make any money off this, but (with luck) Jake does. And then we all win. Would that change if I released my code? Probably not, but why take the risk. Jake gets to "ok" each release before anyone else sees it, but he wouldn't have that option if I released the code, people could make whatever changes they liked, tweaking it so that it better matched their concept of how combat should look, but that changed version might lead others to thinking that that was what TROS combat looked like, potentially affecting sales if those "unauthorised" versions sucked.
And that sums up many of my problems with free source right there.
Brian.
In other words, your objections are crap. The only versions people will see will be the ones they get off the official website. That is, your versions.
Yes, if you released the code, sufficiently motivated people with considerable knowledge of a relatively obscure programming language (that is, a VERY small percentage of even the Internet population.) might make little tweaks to your program to make it better fit their tastes. In fact, they might end up better fitting the taste of a number of other people AND the tRoS rules.
But you're right. There's no point in arguing the merit of Free Source.
My point was simply that I *DO* give out my code to anyone who asks for it, and that you have nothing to lose by doing the same in this case.
For that matter, I have nothing to gain by asking for your source. THAT was my point (a minor one) which you managed to divert due to the strength of your feelings and the length of your expostulations on the subject.
Since I have no desire to learn Delphi,
and since you wouldn't give me the code anyway,
and since you're (understandably) unlikely to adapt your code to my needs (and won't let anyone else do it either...)
...*sigh* I guess I'll have to make my own.
In Visual BASIC.
And put the source up on MY website (which I will have to make) so that anyone else (with sufficient motivation and knowledge of a somewhat less obscure langauge) can adapt my program to their needs.
Now, let's get this discussion back into the friendly, where it belongs.
<<angry reply which some people have undoubtably already read deleted>>
Bob, never again tell me that all your comments come with a "free smiley" and then continue to insult me using that as an excuse.
According to you I'm petty, an amateur, out for nothing but fame, my opinions are "crap" and I'm somehow a lesser man than you because I choose not to give away for free something that I have put time and effort into (whether or not I make money from it is irrelevant).
This discussion is over. I wont be responding to you again or even reading your messages unless you care to get off my back and apologise for constantly insulting me with no provovation just because you're trapped on top of that "free source" soapbox.
Brian.
I'm dropping the axe. Stop it.
Bob-
You have no place to tell Brian what to do with his code. It's his. As for using this forum to debate the topic...I'm a little miffed. Use PM or email if you want something this caustic and personal to be discussed.
I'm not deleting anything, but this thread is closed, as is the topic. It stops *now.* Chill the hell out.
Jake,
who hates moderating and doesn't want it to happen again.
Quote from: Jake NorwoodI'm dropping the axe. Stop it.
Bob-
You have no place to tell Brian what to do with his code. It's his. As for using this forum to debate the topic...I'm a little miffed. Use PM or email if you want something this caustic and personal to be discussed.
I'm not deleting anything, but this thread is closed, as is the topic. It stops *now.* Chill the hell out.
Jake,
who hates moderating and doesn't want it to happen again.
I'm no longer in the habit of getting in protracted arguments over meaningless points over the Internet.
Though it seems I *am* still in the habit of not actually getting my point across. *sigh* :)
Quote from: Bob RichterThough it seems I *am* still in the habit of not actually getting my point across. *sigh* :)
Yeah, it happens, especially in this medium. When in print (or on screen), it's often best to take a more moderate tone or approach then you actually would use when speaking or with someone you know.
I'm not saying this specifically to Bob (though it obviously applies here), but to lots of folks out there.
Jake
Um, don't make me lock the thread down. Let's start a new thread for the COmbat SIm's compatability (the new version will be going up tomorrow).
Jake