Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Robbnva
fyi - this isn't proof

True... Bort's been wrong about aspects of his own game before. But in the absence of any actual evidence that Bort is wrong about this particular aspect of the game, we should begin with the assumption that Bort is correct.

If Nok has any evidence that Bort is incorrect on this, he should share it. Since he hasn't, I'm going to take Bort's word over Nok's.

Originally posted by Novus
True... Bort's been wrong about aspects of his own game before. But in the absence of any actual evidence that Bort is wrong about this particular aspect of the game, we should begin with the assumption that Bort is correct.

If Nok has any evidence that Bort is incorrect on this, he should share it. Since he hasn't, I'm going to take Bort's word over Nok's.

I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that bort is correct about the decimal points, I think the guy was just asking can you HONESTLY see a difference in the sim between 160.83 and 160.27 strength?

I don't think you can, outside of maybe the WL (and probably not even in the WL), most people won't notice a difference of .56 in an attribute.

Originally posted by Robbnva
I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that bort is correct about the decimal points, I think the guy was just asking can you HONESTLY see a difference in the sim between 160.83 and 160.27 strength?

I don't think you can, outside of maybe the WL (and probably not even in the WL), most people won't notice a difference of .56 in an attribute.


Can't say I disagree.

But again, "no discernible difference" does not equal "no difference at all." It's a small difference, but small amounts add up.

I just found Nok's point to be silly, since you can take the same argument he makes for "Why take WW from 14 to 15?" and apply it to the question "Why take WW from 0 to 1?" Yet he seems to think they're two different questions Seems like an odd concept to be making build decisions around.

He definitely gives people something to think about, I'd still probably take it to 15, but if I felt I needed a va point to go elsewhere I'd have no problem leaving it at 14.

Originally posted by Nokturnus
Poor logic and unpopular logic are two different things. I trust you know the difference.
Indeed we do, which is why so many attempted to help you understand how yours was so poor.


Originally posted by Robbnva
I don't think anyone is arguing the fact that bort is correct about the decimal points
That's exactly what he was arguing, as he stated it multiple times. You can stop posting now.

Originally posted by Robbnva
He definitely gives people something to think about, I'd still probably take it to 15, but if I felt I needed a va point to go elsewhere I'd have no problem leaving it at 14.
He didn't give anyone anything to think about. His entire argument was idiotic. Either an attribute is one of your top five choices or it's not. If it's not, then don't invest any points at all.

Originally posted by Novus


I just found Nok's point to be silly, since you can take the same argument he makes for "Why take WW from 14 to 15?" and apply it to the question "Why take WW from 0 to 1?" Yet he seems to think they're two different questions


JD is right, and Novus' summary nails the reason why jd is right.

Originally posted by Nokturnus
Poor logic and unpopular logic are two different things. I trust you know the difference.



Indeed I do, and yours is the former and not the latter

Originally posted by jdbolick

That's exactly what he was arguing, as he stated it multiple times. You can stop posting now.

Actually he didn't argue that at all, but because you require to be right all the time, I'll lie to your face and say you are right.

Better?

Originally posted by Robbnva
Actually he didn't argue that at all, but because you require to be right all the time, I'll lie to your face and say you are right. Better?
No. Read these:

Originally posted by Nokturnus
If the attribute VA is something like speed and it is only a .3% per level usually you should be even stingier and figure out where 15 will take you in that attribute and minus percentages until you are still inside that whole number (160.1-160.99) with the least investment in that VA.
Originally posted by Nokturnus
I understand that as far as it not being a diminishing return but if the 14th and 15th VA point doesn't actually bring the attribute up a whole point does it in fact have an effect in the sim? naturally, tackling any 2 VAs is going to bring it up a point but if the 14th takes it to 160.21 there is no point in the 15th since it won't take it over 161 is my argument for the situation.
Originally posted by Nokturnus
Not really seeing it as a contradiction. 13 brought it up to an even level whereas the other 2 VA points do not bring it up any attribute points.

It's fine that he didn't know the sim counts the decimals, but he shouldn't have argued it after being enlightened. It's similarly fine that you didn't know he was making that argument, but you shouldn't be arguing it after being enlightened. Your problem has always been the belligerence that follows your ignorance, not the ignorance itself.

Originally posted by Robbnva
Actually he didn't argue that at all, but because you require to be right all the time, I'll lie to your face and say you are right.

Better?

Yup, and i'm gonna argue that GLB only counts numbers every 5 whole number.....75,80,85 etc.... and im gonna have a valid argument simply because my own invalid opinion says so. All the while ignoring facts and just reverting back to a flawed and completely false opinion that is based off of nothing at all in the way of facts and evidence.

Originally posted by jdbolick

He didn't give anyone anything to think about. His entire argument was idiotic. Either an attribute is one of your top five choices or it's not. If it's not, then don't invest any points at all.

Thanks for not answering my question.

From the quoting of my quote, does it in fact have an effect in the SIM. Never said the decimals didn't make a difference somewhere, just curious if it's more than a grain of salt difference. Is it one that matters? While I'm not arguing that Bort said the game takes decimals into account I'm just curious how much they matter.

All you can really go off of is numbers, player production. I've seen no decrease in the dots that I did this on. I didn't do all of them as a sort of "control". That and the fact no one else seems to think it is a merited way to go about your VAs. They are also part of the control equation.

Findings have been inconclusive, that's the point I was getting at.

I don't have the burden of proof since I am in fact questioning the situation. I never said anyone was wrong, that is what you are telling me. The burden of proof is with all of you telling me I am absolutely 100% wrong yet the only thing you have to fire at me is "Bort said".

As I mentioned, make me a believer.

Aside from all the decimal crap, why do some feel WW isn't a good VA?

not sure why this went 7 pages...though i giggle at the guys that say they are using wow because its the same guys i feel are wasting opportunities.