Warrior General Games

Originally posted by Ken1
Originally posted by yello1

But apparently people like the problem, and as to that there is no accounting for tastes.

Many of us like the "problem" because we don't think that it's a problem that taking spreadsheet minmaxing to an extreme can backfire. You did admit I had a point on that before.

It's not a problem, it's a few people that think they have to exploit the game to get ahead and breakthroughs are one way to kind of prevent them. If it's not happening all the time or even a tenth of every time someone trains an attribute into the 90s, then it is simply not a problem.

Originally posted by yello1
Originally posted by Outlaw Dogs

And to pile on, the current system is not only random in when you get it but how much it is. Breakouts early in a build or depending on when & where you are training something, (first time training an attribute that might only be at 6 or 8 are going to be bigger then training an attribute at 99,) are often worth more then a BT but different times could be worth less then a BT, that adds more randomness then just giving out a single BT for every breakthrough.

Plus if we are going down this road, I would suggest that you stop trying to suggest stuff to stop annoying a few customers because you could make just as many people happy if you would not post in the suggestions forums anymore.

Since Bort knows the numbers involved the BT count could be adjusted accordingly. You could even have fractional BTs or if thats too nasty a can of worms have another random roll to get a BT or not (ie if it would equate to 4/5ths of a BT then you would have an 80% of getting one or a 20% of not getting a breakthrough train after all).

As for the rest, lol


As for the second half of that, take a poll and lets see which is a bigger problem.

Originally posted by Ken1
Many of us like the "problem" because we don't think that it's a problem that taking spreadsheet minmaxing to an extreme can backfire. You did admit I had a point on that before.

People complaining about a feature is a problem. Ideally all customers will be happy at all times.

But yes, thats a valid point you make as well.

Originally posted by Outlaw Dogs

As for the second half of that, take a poll and lets see which is a bigger problem.


I think we did that.

Unscientific, weighted to forum luddites, but still. I am fairly convinced.

Originally posted by IdRatherFlyFish
I like the breakthroughs. I do a little dance inside my head every time I get one. If I get two in a row I throw a party.

If we switch to BT's then I think we're back to cookie cutter builds. Everyone would hold their BTs and use them on the same thing. So the randomness of the breakthroughs is pretty important to the game (I think)

So I'm -1

Peace,

Fish

Hmm, not sure everyone would spend the BTs the same but that's a point as well.

The best answer to cookie cutter is more equally valid choices and tactics in my opinion, rather than randomly preventing people from maximizing their training under the existing system.

I still prefer my outcome but you all make some reasoned opposition and it could go either way and be okay.

So I'm gonna say fin to the thread. So if I do not respond to further replies its not being rude. Just think I've said all I can say on the issue.

Originally posted by beenlurken
You are the problem... and no, no one likes you... so heed my advice and this great suggestion will prosper!

People not only like me, they love me.

c-c-c-combo breaker

I dont see them putting this in place. Either catch or bort has posted they actually kinda like the fact that a breakthrough can "mess up" a build.

This is just a way to further exploit the system. Since the auto training system was added the only time we even know we got a breakthrough is when we are screwed over by one. But if you get a lot/not many "BT" breakthroughs you'll lose some of the mystery.

Catch has verified this is NGTH.