• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Time Online

    575d 17h 41m 35s

Community Reputation

7772 Excellent

About Cervantes3773

  • Rank
    Guys! How about that Fat Yuan Yuan?! Right?!


  • Location Cincinnati, OH, USA


  • ITS PIN Z2928
  1. It's an effect of being Prone. http://infinitythewiki.com/en/Prone There's no other stated elevation bonus.
  2. "Just fifteen minutes can get you your ass kicked by the Gecko Squadron!"
  3. It's nothing personal against them, I would just rather that the info be from BoW to the factions, without middlemen.
  4. (1) Why? I think overly long battle reports are boring. Give me the relevant details and a couple good pics and I'm set, I don't even need captions. If you can clearly and concisely cover your game in 150 to 200 words with 3 to 5 pictures, I'm thrilled. I don't want people who do those bomb-ass comic book-style, or those Charles Dickens-esque reports to stop... they're just not my bag. I'm not going to rate them poorly, but I will rate those I like well. (2) Drop the faction reps in favor of direct from BoW communication. Post in the faction forums with "CA, this is EI Construct Zzyzx. Your mission, if you choose to accept it (and why wouldn't you, we'll kill you if you don't) is to XYZ". And then, Phase 2 "CA duders, congrats on achieving public goals A and B, and secret goal C. Shout out to Morat Commander Kevinat and Shasvasti Special Operative Steeveskiin for doing goodly on the campaign. For Phase 2, your mission is......" "Haqqislam Commanders, this is Haqim, the Sultan's Envoy. The Nomads have sent intelligence and resources. You should expect an offensive at [location] from Yu Jing forces. Additionally, with their resources, you have been able to reinforce your holdings at [location] (+10 points)." Basically, guide some of the roleplaying a bit and give a little more structure beyond "go and make good reports and don't worry about the rest".
  5. Report a passable draw and no one will even notice.
  6. (1) Nothing concrete, because the system is not in place. However, I don't really rate reports except when I upload my own. Maybe one or two here there otherwise if I'm checking the faction forum. Usually the more recent ones from my faction and our location/locations of interest. The only report I'm guaranteed to rate is my opponent's once we're linked. Since Wotan has started, I've probably rated less than 2 reports per day. (2) We already have people with multiple accounts acting as spies. Overall, I'd like the game system to not reward unsportsmanlike behavior. As a concrete example, someone is rewarded if they make one or more fake accounts to spy on their opponents because they gain new intel/information on enemy plans. In a limited-rating system, those same people would also get additional votes. And, if out of faction votes are weighted differently... I think a larger GM presence might help. Mediocre on whose scale? Your "mediocre" is Hieronymus' "exceeds expectations" and Nero's "absolute derivative dribble".
  7. Lots of reports get submitted daily, and not every player rates reports. If you've got 100 players, maybe half would use all 5 ratings per day, maybe some use just a couple, some wouldn't rate anything. Let's say 300 ratings out of 500 get used. If those same 100 players submit 100 reports (1 game each), it's possible that some reports get rated several times, while others don't get rated at all. Yeah, it's possible that each report would get rated 3 times... it's also possible that a faction's top five players get their reports rated 10 times each, and more than a couple reports get nothing. On that day, let's say 10 reports go unrated. Then 10 the next day, and so on. If players make an effort to rate unrated reports, they can't rate the new ones. Inevitably, the number of unrated reports would increase and increase, or the average ratings per report would decrease. It's hard to evaluate what a report's ratings mean if it only got rated once or twice. Lastly, people would then make fake accounts just to get extra ratings.
  8. So you don't like regular Supremacy either? What about the rest of the scenarios in Phase 2? You directly comment on one of them, but it seems like you're painting all of them with a broad brush.
  9. I've also thought that 5 stars might be better. The system basically judges both "realness" and "quality" as one ~thing~, but they're independent variables. As a result, I find myself mostly rating 8 to 10, or not rating at all. I can only speak for myself, but knowing that ratings are, in part, used to measure whether a report really happened, my bar for "top tier reporting" is probably much lower than others. It doesn't feel right to me to rate Rogelio's clear, concise report that hit the highlights and is accompanied by a few pictures less than Aloysius's Infinite Jest: the Battle Report, which is accompanied by the Complete Work of Ansel Adams. Sure, I'd like to reward Aloysius for his time and effort, but I don't want to punish Rogelio for having less time or just simply not enjoying the act of writing battle reports.
  10. I don't think that's constructive. If X reports are submitted per day, and players, as a whole, are only able to rate some fraction of that, there will inevitably be a gap between reports submitted and ratings given. We can speculate why that might be, and we can tell people to then only rate good reports, but the end result is lots of reports with few or no ratings. Compounding that, ratings given will then be more influential. "Yeah, it's a good report, and someone already gave it a 10, so I'll pass" or "Someone already gave it 1 star. I think it's a 6 star report, but... I'm already done with ratings for the day." However, if reports were limited - players could only submit 1 or 2 per day, and we were given, say, 10 ratings... that might reduce the number of unrated/infrequently rated reports. But, if BoW's goal is to use ratings as a measure of veracity/realness of a report, I don't think the above plan, or any plan that limits how often someone can rate something, would work towards that goal.
  11. I didn't know they called blenders "confusion" in your part of the Sphere....
  12. So.... it's not a flaw, it's a feature. #panotechsupport
  13. They're slow and have long-range weapons, so hacking is less of an issue with them than, say, a high-MOV, in your face HI. You're missing out. /And I've just fought against them.