Jason Petho Wrote:[quote=Silkster53]
No where did I say I would not try it?
.
Jason Petho Wrote:No where did you say you would?
I was merely suggesting to give it a whirl when they are available.
Ugh!
Silkster53 Wrote:You say 50%, then I'll take you at your word. If it plays to 90% then I'll take Huib at his word.
Jason Petho Wrote:I stated it was subjective. With the glitches fixed and the new math I believe you'll see a 50% difference.
Subjective and math go so well together?
Silkster53 Wrote:Did you not understand what I wrote?
Jason Petho Wrote:Obviously not.
Ugh and ugh.
Silkster53 Wrote:Now you want to play with my words? And, try to go on an offshoot of designers who have changed their styles?
C'mon, I expect better.
Jason Petho Wrote:That is how I interpreted your words and responded to that interpretation.
*shakes head*
Silkster53 Wrote:Don't bring up armor facing. That option does not fundamentally change the game.
Jason Petho Wrote:To some it does.
Hmmmm. I've never, ever heard anyone say as much.
Except for Huib who has complained about the armor facing effects within the scale of the game, but he also had issues with the scale of time and space of the game also, with (as I understood) the scenario designer could make a single game represent days and hours and not minutes. I'm sure if I misunderstand that he will correct me?
I've used armor facing on or off as per my opponent's request. Personally I like it on. Though most game results were never affected by either it's use or lack of use.
Ed