Cantr II Discussion Forum

Especially to the Surly Cantrian as well as Lumin and some others whose posts sometimes seem to apply...

Please could you refrain from "this change sucks/is the worst ever"/"I can't understand how Jos could be so stupid"/"Anthony wants his characters to benefit" and perhaps use the more constructive: "I dislike x because y"

Even if Jos&co suddenly decided to make Jos's character able to call balls of flaming carrots onto everybody else, or removed all the hematite, or doubled the strength "hitpoints" of all male characters, I don't feel that they deserve the abuse to which they are regularly being inflicted.

You having invested/wasted hundreds of hours on your characters, or a change being totally unreasonable or biased does not change the fact that they have a right to do what they want. You knew the terms and conditions when you joined.

This forum has been nicely placed for us to air our views, hopefully so they can be guided in some of their decision making. But that is entirely up to them. Whether I like it or not, or whether they are plain wrong doesn't really affect that.

If the powers that be are making decisions totally based apon their characters, or their egos, I, too, will be justifiably miffed - it just doesn't seem right. But, as this is a free game, owned by them, they really can do what they want - I would say my say and either stick with it or decide not to.

If you don't like it, you are free to vote with your feet. I, for one, would be happy if you dropped us all a brief post stating your reasons for departure, but it would be preferable if it was not in the form of a ranting, abusive tirade.

Otherwise we could simply accept that Jos&co probably also want the most enjoyable game for all. We could accept that they are aware of many of the short-comings, and also regularly make some rather poor or badly-balanced changes. But we could also accept that the "state of continual testing and refinement", coupled with the contents of these forums, will hopefully give us a state of regular improvement. Yes, there are a number of changes that also seem to me (at this stage) to be poorly implemented or designed...

But trying to get what we want by flaming, ranting, or telling everybody how stupid or biased is the person who came up with the latest fault?

Sorry, but that strikes me as immaturity and refusal to accept responsibility for your own decisions.

Well seeing as this isn't far away from a personal attack on me, I feel compelled to answer.

Have you read any of my posts? How is any of tht not constructive? I have suggested alternatives, I have stated in as many ways as I can (and there are many) why the change is bad.

I have have wasted far more than hundreds of hours if all my characters are torn apart by animals because of a poorly reasoned change. Of course I'm unhappy. At least 4 of my characters could easily die as a direct result of this change. And the justification for their deaths? "We'd like people to use the combat system more"! Maybe the RD should look at how it was successful before, rather than piling changes on that do little but make it worse.

You suggest I leave? Well thank you for that. It's nice to know that people can tell me to be constructive in my criticism, and then spout out one of the least constructive ideas I've ever heard.

olaf wrote: Sorry, but that strikes me as immaturity and refusal to accept responsibility for your own decisions.

Sorry, I am refuing to take responsibility for my decisions? So far when I try to pin down who was behind the change, they all pass the buck. Only RKL is prepared to stand up and say why he implemented this, but it isn't me who is refusing to accept that this change is unpopular. Just because certain people are on better terms with the Cantr hierarchy doesn't mean they know any better than I do. Believe me, if I wanted to just flame, I would. But flaming me because of my frustration at the apparent lack of thought behind the shield change? Well, you can just screw off. I stand by every word that I've said, because I firmly believe that RD got this wrong.

olaf wrote:Especially to the Surly Cantrian as well as Lumin and some others whose posts sometimes seem to apply...

Please could you refrain from "this change sucks/is the worst ever"/"I can't understand how Jos could be so stupid"/"Anthony wants his characters to benefit" and perhaps use the more constructive: "I dislike x because y"

Even if Jos&co suddenly decided to make Jos's character able to call balls of flaming carrots onto everybody else, or removed all the hematite, or doubled the strength "hitpoints" of all male characters, I don't feel that they deserve the abuse to which they are regularly being inflicted.

You having invested/wasted hundreds of hours on your characters, or a change being totally unreasonable or biased does not change the fact that they have a right to do what they want. You knew the terms and conditions when you joined.

This forum has been nicely placed for us to air our views, hopefully so they can be guided in some of their decision making. But that is entirely up to them. Whether I like it or not, or whether they are plain wrong doesn't really affect that.

If the powers that be are making decisions totally based apon their characters, or their egos, I, too, will be justifiably miffed - it just doesn't seem right. But, as this is a free game, owned by them, they really can do what they want - I would say my say and either stick with it or decide not to.

If you don't like it, you are free to vote with your feet. I, for one, would be happy if you dropped us all a brief post stating your reasons for departure, but it would be preferable if it was not in the form of a ranting, abusive tirade.

Otherwise we could simply accept that Jos&co probably also want the most enjoyable game for all. We could accept that they are aware of many of the short-comings, and also regularly make some rather poor or badly-balanced changes. But we could also accept that the "state of continual testing and refinement", coupled with the contents of these forums, will hopefully give us a state of regular improvement. Yes, there are a number of changes that also seem to me (at this stage) to be poorly implemented or designed...

But trying to get what we want by flaming, ranting, or telling everybody how stupid or biased is the person who came up with the latest fault?

Sorry, but that strikes me as immaturity and refusal to accept responsibility for your own decisions.

... just because we or some people dont like the new change doesent mean you have to rant about us ranting . If you like the new change to vote at the poll!!

Cantr constitution (if there was one)

1. All players shall hold the right and responsibility to bitch, moan, complain and so forth, as they so wish. With or without constructive comments. Fully in the knowledge that as the game is without charge for enjoyment, they will most surely be promptly ignored by the powers that be.

hallucinatingfarmer wrote:Cantr constitution (if there was one)

1. All players shall hold the right and responsibility to bitch, moan, complain and so forth, as they so wish. With or without constructive comments. Fully in the knowledge that as the game is without charge for enjoyment, they will most surely be promptly ignored by the powers that be.

Yes well you can imagine that if you were making a game that you thought was great, one that you worked really hard on and kept free so that everyone could enjoy it, you'd get a little upset at the "I hate this" and the "I hate that"s. might even make it so that people would have to pay. I'd do it, just in spite of their "bitch, moan, complaining and so forth.".

To have everyone putting down almost everything put into the game before they even fully test it can get to be annoying I'm sure not too mention discouraging...

As for constructive critisism, I'm all for it. That is a time tested way of improvment for many people.

But whilst most people moan, you'll find just as much praise for when something gets done right...

Surly wrote:I have have wasted far more than hundreds of hours if all my characters are torn apart by animals because of a poorly reasoned change. Of course I'm unhappy. At least 4 of my characters could easily die as a direct result of this change. And the justification for their deaths? "We'd like people to use the combat system more"! Maybe the RD should look at how it was successful before, rather than piling changes on that do little but make it worse.

This is my main argument against the shield change, and dont consider it to be either bitchy, moany or whiny, I think it's a Wholly justified Argument

But whilst most people moan, you'll find just as much praise for when something gets done right...

Exactly. Take the resource gathering change for instance. Surly and I both had no problems with that one, I'm all for it, in fact.

You'll also notice that Jos had a good, detailed explanation as to why he made it and what he hoped it would do, and was willing to share that explanation with the players, unlike whoever made the (pointless and unbalancing) shield change.

Mr. Floyd wrote:

Surly wrote:I have have wasted far more than hundreds of hours if all my characters are torn apart by animals because of a poorly reasoned change. Of course I'm unhappy. At least 4 of my characters could easily die as a direct result of this change. And the justification for their deaths? "We'd like people to use the combat system more"! Maybe the RD should look at how it was successful before, rather than piling changes on that do little but make it worse.

This is my main argument against the shield change, and dont consider it to be either bitchy, moany or whiny, I think it's a Wholly justified Argument

I agree with Floyd, and that Is what I think to. Shields are pretty much useless now. Or at least a waist of time

I think everyone should get to complain as much as they want to. That's one of the things the forums are for. If you don't like Surly's (or anyone else's) posts then skip over them.

I've said before that I think Jos and the other programmers are like artists in that they need to develop thick skins to deal with the criticisms of thier art form. They are grown ups (mostly) and I think they can handle it. It might piss them off sometimes but we are pretty much all pissed off at something involving Cantr at one point or another. They also get plenty of praise and I trust that they can balance the information feedback appropriately.

Shields are pretty much useless now. Or at least a waist of time

My feelings as well. At least I'm not going to bother to build them anymore...not even sure if I should bother repairing the ones I have.

I don't find shields to be useless. My char with a wooden shield was attacked by an animal soon after the change.and suffered no damage at all.

I haven't had time to read all the posts so I don't know if he said this anywhere but last night in the irc chat Anthony said he was going to raise the shield protection value somewhat. I think he meant it. I don't know if he's already done it.

Well, that's good to hear. I figured if there were people saving 0% with an iron shield, than bone and wood was less than useless.

Does anyone know if the changes have actually been made yet?

I think those 0%ers are probably characters who were already monumentally bad at self-defense before the change. notice some of the characters TSC listed were blocking (semi-)decent amounts.

The thing is... I was royally screwed over by the random weapon skills. I am sure there are people for whom that made their people better... but all of my characters are worse. No-one has improved, and for most of them their dire skills are declining, no matter what they do.

However I was adapting. I know that almost everyone my characters meet are stronger than them. Yes, that makes the game a whole lot less enjoyable for me, but I was pulling through.

But the shield change... that really was a kick in the teeth for me. To have 5 people saving 0% with an iron shield... That really does suck a lot of the fun out.

Maybe they could be some way to ensure a player has a balnce of characters? Because having 15 bad characters isn't going to encourage new players... no matter how much you tell them its "realistic" and that things will get better. If I'd known that working for 30 years would leave be no better off in terms of defending myself? I wouldn't have bothered.