so, how is this?

#51IlluminaZer0Posted 1/7/2013 1:34:28 PM(edited)
clowning posted...
Well, you are only cherry picking...

I never knew that replying to the entirety of a post was "cherry picking." What an odd definition.

Furthermore, there are issues I have covered which you ignored under the heading of "whining" because you have no answer to it.

Except I copy-pasted pretty much the entire post once again.

I do enjoy that most of your great changes are simply fluff. Apparently if I say you are in command of armies rather than units, that's innovation! What remarkable creativity!

Furthermore, the ability to hire champions in E:FE is a technology that belongs to the Altair faction, if I remember correctly, and is therefore not really applicable to what I am talking about. But then, you are being disingenuous about everything else, so why not this?

It's an identical gameplay feature made faction specific. Obviously the designers considered generic champions and decided to made it a faction specific ability.

It is simply a false statement to claim "Why do I have to hire a mercenary champion/general/admiral/governor" on that criteria, amongst other criteria (such as the player being forced to hire multiple champions at all.)

This should also (hopefully) make it obvious that the designers decided against generic champions being a generic feature to all factions.

I do like that you simply do not acknowledge that you were wrong about faction Sovereigns having individual personalities that effect their AI as well.

This admits that I am right, and you are wrong. Your ego, however, seems incapable of admitting to this fact.

It must take remarkable effort to be this delusional.

You seem confused. I might be wrong but I suspect you are too emotional...

I sense massive projection in this, and likely the former as well. Which is to be expected of someone that can't stop whining.
#52IlluminaZer0Posted 1/7/2013 1:44:20 PM(edited)
Oh yes, and I forgot that obvious:

clowning posted...
This is just dumb. E:FE is a 4x game. I have only been discussing 4x games.

clowning posted...
^^

OK, don't take this as an insult, but your entire post smacks of "I have no imagination".

This genre is an empire building genre. This does not mean that every single one of them has to be a copy paste.

As I (and others) have been echoing, it sounds like you just hate 4x games. Maybe you should consider playing other "empire building" games like Nobunaga's Ambition: Iron Triangle. You'll find that many of the things you want are there.

Or better yet, create a design doc and prototype your remarkable ideas. It seems quite clear that we all lack imagination and need to be enlightened by you.
#53clowningPosted 1/7/2013 2:22:01 PM
IlluminaZer0 posted...


As I (and others) have been echoing, it sounds like you just hate 4x games. Maybe you should consider playing other "empire building" games like Nobunaga's Ambition: Iron Triangle. You'll find that many of the things you want are there.


Well...obviously I don't hate 4x games. If I hated them, I would not care if the genre was in a state of decay. I obviously care, therefore suggesting that I do like this genre.

All I ever wanted to do was provide the TC an answer based on facts and not meaningless hyperbole. But some people took my factual answer as some sort of personal insult and were emotionally distressed. Either that or some people don't want to face the fact that this genre is in a poor state.

Either way, everything I have said is factual, so other than emotionalism or being some shill, I don't understand the problem. I never said I hate this game. In fact, I have tried to keep personal reactions to a minimum, and tried to stick to facts. I did say a couple times that I have fun playing this game on occasion. The problem is that some people are responding emotionally, whereas I am responding rationally. This emotional response has led to false conclusions and silly non-arguments (you're whining!). It's not a matter of "you stupid, me smart". We are just having a different kind of conversation.

I know you used the word "enlighten" in an attempt to be dismissive and insulting, but let me say this: I do not believe one person can enlighten another. "Enlightenment" comes by thinking about what someone has said, rationally, carefully, analytically, weighing the idea, testing it, and so on over time. We enlighten ourselves. That's a simplified version of my notions on this issue, but it's generally correct. That is off-topic, but you brought it up (though you were just being sassy).
---
It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. ...one begins to twist facts to suit theories.... Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
#54IlluminaZer0Posted 1/7/2013 2:41:22 PM(edited)
clowning posted...
All I ever wanted to do was provide the TC an answer based on facts and not meaningless hyperbole. But some people took my factual answer...

Hmm...

Why is the diplomacy system so amazingly bad, every single time, with absolutely ZERO improvement?

This genre is an empire building genre. This does not mean that every single one of them has to be a copy paste.

This seems to be pretty strong hyperbole. The former lacks any basis for even analyzing "improvement." The latter well... You don't actually believe all Empire Building games are copy paste right? I shouldn't need to point this out.

Why is there no deep cultural/religious aspect to factions?

I don't even know how one can factually analyze this.

...as some sort of personal insult and were emotionally distressed...

You keep bringing this up. Do you even know what projection is? I suggest you google it if you do not.

I do not believe one person can enlighten another...

So why even bring it up?

"Enlightenment" comes by thinking about what someone has said, rationally, carefully, analytically, weighing the idea, testing it, and so on over time. We enlighten ourselves. That's a simplified version of my notions on this issue, but it's generally correct. That is off-topic, but you brought it up (though you were just being sassy).

Such flamboyant hypocrisy.