|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 25, 2014 23:18:07 GMT -5
I am not uncalm. I am just making the executive decision to close this down now, since, as I said, there is no point drawing it out when there will not be a big enough majority to warrant a change. No point turning it into a problem-thread when there doesn't appear to be a problem to begin with.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - The Broad Street Bullies on May 26, 2014 7:48:39 GMT -5
Sounds good
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on May 26, 2014 9:22:59 GMT -5
as far as initial build problem with sarah goes... you have had 40-50pts that you've put in her and you could have fixed any problems with her initial build by now. So any problem with her now is your own.
when you said "I actually have no problem with paying a point to re-distribute points; that makes sense to me. It's the dropping of points to add is what I have a major problem with. It's a waste of points in my view."
this is different wording but the same as what it currently is unless we talk about multiple upgrades. currently you drop a point in a stat and then pay 1 point to upgrade 1 point. you said you pay a point to redistribute. so if we are talking about upgrading 3 points.. you are saying you pay 1 point to redistribute and you switch 3 stats for free? as opposed to my idea where you would pay 0 to redistribute but would pay your usual upgrade costs for improving a stat. so it would cost 3 points to upgrade and you would lower a stat by 3. If you thought about it as paying a single point to re-distribute a single point each time you want to switch a single stat point it would be the exact same thing. because when you re-distribute a point you would have to lower a stat by 1 (drop a point) and you would raise a stat by 1 and you would still be paying 1 point for that redistribution. if you wanted to upgrade 3 points for example then you would have to pay 3 points as a redistributing cost then you could lower a stat by 3 and raise another stat by 3... my idea says you pay 1 point to upgrade 1 point whereas your idea to pay it as a redistribution cost is exactly the same thing. BUT paying 1 point to re-distribute and then changing 3 stats is broken. and it could be manipulated. everyone would cap a fighter on purpose if they don't already have a capped fighter cause capped fighters would be even stronger. because what your saying is... i could pay 1 point to redistribute and i could change all my points and completely change my fighter to a different style.
so fedor (who is capped)is fighting cro cop who is a stand up fighter.. before the fight fedor pays 1 point to redistribute and he changes 30 stat points to improve his takedowns and weakens his standup so he can kill cro cop on the ground. next fight fedor fights someone who is weak in stand up so guess what fedor pays 1 point and redistributes 40 stat points to make him a stand up monster... see this is broken... lets look at hard this would be doing things my way.
fedor fights cro cop. fedor drops 30 stat points and has to pay 30 points to improve. see this just doesn't work. (not broken)
Sorry about the essay guys but i wanted to explain how my idea is not broken and how kruze's idea is basically the same thing when looking at only a single point.. but anything more than 1 point is broken.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - The Broad Street Bullies on May 26, 2014 11:29:56 GMT -5
GAP brings up a very good point.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on May 26, 2014 15:18:00 GMT -5
What poll are you looking at? This poll clearly shows that I'm not the only one that feels this is not the way it should be. If what you're saying were true, I'd be the only one up there with a yes vote, and clearly I'm not. I am looking at the one that is currently 5-3 in favour of NOT your change. And if you go by the comments, it's actually 7-2, since Ferocity is against it but has not voted, and GAP voted Yes in your poll but is against your change (poor poll wording). Being that we have 12 active ManMMA members, I think it's safe to close this poll and delcare it a no. We have 6 votes against, so best we'll get out of this if Storm, Cannon, Rocketmen, and Knockouts support it is a 6-6 draw. I'd want a heavy majority for a change like this, since I would be performing an action in the simulator itself I am not comfortable with. No doubt that's due to your own manipulating bullshit behind the scenes, as usual, Justin. It was 3-3, then a sudden surge and a switch of 1 vote? lol You're actually doing more damage to yourself than you realize. What did you promise that one voter to switch their vote, I wonder... lol |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 26, 2014 15:30:19 GMT -5
so fedor (who is capped)is fighting cro cop who is a stand up fighter.. before the fight fedor pays 1 point to redistribute and he changes 30 stat points to improve his takedowns and weakens his standup so he can kill cro cop on the ground. next fight fedor fights someone who is weak in stand up so guess what fedor pays 1 point and redistributes 40 stat points to make him a stand up monster... see this is broken... lets look at hard this would be doing things my way. This is a good point I had not considered. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on May 26, 2014 15:35:33 GMT -5
as far as initial build problem with sarah goes... you have had 40-50pts that you've put in her and you could have fixed any problems with her initial build by now. So any problem with her now is your own. when you said "I actually have no problem with paying a point to re-distribute points; that makes sense to me. It's the dropping of points to add is what I have a major problem with. It's a waste of points in my view." this is different wording but the same as what it currently is unless we talk about multiple upgrades. currently you drop a point in a stat and then pay 1 point to upgrade 1 point. you said you pay a point to redistribute. so if we are talking about upgrading 3 points.. you are saying you pay 1 point to redistribute and you switch 3 stats for free? as opposed to my idea where you would pay 0 to redistribute but would pay your usual upgrade costs for improving a stat. so it would cost 3 points to upgrade and you would lower a stat by 3. If you thought about it as paying a single point to re-distribute a single point each time you want to switch a single stat point it would be the exact same thing. because when you re-distribute a point you would have to lower a stat by 1 (drop a point) and you would raise a stat by 1 and you would still be paying 1 point for that redistribution. if you wanted to upgrade 3 points for example then you would have to pay 3 points as a redistributing cost then you could lower a stat by 3 and raise another stat by 3... my idea says you pay 1 point to upgrade 1 point whereas your idea to pay it as a redistribution cost is exactly the same thing. BUT paying 1 point to re-distribute and then changing 3 stats is broken. and it could be manipulated. everyone would cap a fighter on purpose if they don't already have a capped fighter cause capped fighters would be even stronger. because what your saying is... i could pay 1 point to redistribute and i could change all my points and completely change my fighter to a different style. so fedor (who is capped)is fighting cro cop who is a stand up fighter.. before the fight fedor pays 1 point to redistribute and he changes 30 stat points to improve his takedowns and weakens his standup so he can kill cro cop on the ground. next fight fedor fights someone who is weak in stand up so guess what fedor pays 1 point and redistributes 40 stat points to make him a stand up monster... see this is broken... lets look at hard this would be doing things my way. fedor fights cro cop. fedor drops 30 stat points and has to pay 30 points to improve. see this just doesn't work. (not broken) Sorry about the essay guys but i wanted to explain how my idea is not broken and how kruze's idea is basically the same thing when looking at only a single point.. but anything more than 1 point is broken. You're my brother and I love you man... but you're an idiot and a hypocrite just like Sandman based on the first paragraph alone; IF you even believe that shit you just spewed. You've been arguing for months yourself now that the initial builds haven't been accurate, now you do an about face on it? What did Sandman offer you? A Fedor makeover? Yes, I have put 53 points into Sarah, BUT when those points were put in based on the idea that she was created accurately in the first place, then yah... some blame falls to Sandman for an inaccurate build. If a fighter has NEVER been KO'd in their career, then should that not constitute a a higher KO resistance? If a fighter has never submitted in there career, should that not constitute a high Sub Defense? You're way off on this Craig... You really are. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 26, 2014 15:39:51 GMT -5
If a fighter has NEVER been KO'd in their career, then should that not constitute a a higher KO resistance? If a fighter has never submitted in there career, should that not constitute a high Sub Defense? Higher than what? Everyone who has ever been KOed or submitted in real life? What makes you think the fighters in question had not been given that on their initial build? Never being KOed doesn't warrant a perfect KO resistance score. But again, all of this is actually besides the greater point. There is no base for one to make this claim to begin with. Since no one knows what the highest or lowest stats are for any of the skills on any fighter when they first come into the league, there is no point of comparison. Without a point of comparison, how can anyone claim a stat is too high or too low? |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on May 26, 2014 21:38:44 GMT -5
If a fighter has NEVER been KO'd in their career, then should that not constitute a a higher KO resistance? If a fighter has never submitted in there career, should that not constitute a high Sub Defense? Higher than what? Everyone who has ever been KOed or submitted in real life? What makes you think the fighters in question had not been given that on their initial build? Never being KOed doesn't warrant a perfect KO resistance score. But again, all of this is actually besides the greater point. There is no base for one to make this claim to begin with. Since no one knows what the highest or lowest stats are for any of the skills on any fighter when they first come into the league, there is no point of comparison. Without a point of comparison, how can anyone claim a stat is too high or too low? No, I never said anything about warranting perfect KO resistance, but should be higher than say 12-14, or lower... which it seems to be where D'Alelio's is, considering that nearly every loss she's had has been via KO or Flash KO... her KO resistance can't be any more than 10-12 right now with that type of record, which is complete bullshit from an initial build standpoint. So yah, I'm saying you fucked up bud. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 26, 2014 22:18:19 GMT -5
her KO resistance can't be any more than 10-12 right now Oh, how little you know. lol. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Team GAP on May 27, 2014 2:28:33 GMT -5
"You're my brother and I love you man... but you're an idiot and a hypocrite just like Sandman based on the first paragraph alone; IF you even believe that shit you just spewed. You've been arguing for months yourself now that the initial builds haven't been accurate, now you do an about face on it? What did Sandman offer you? A Fedor makeover? Yes, I have put 53 points into Sarah, BUT when those points were put in based on the idea that she was created accurately in the first place, then yah... some blame falls to Sandman for an inaccurate build. If a fighter has NEVER been KO'd in their career, then should that not constitute a a higher KO resistance? If a fighter has never submitted in there career, should that not constitute a high Sub Defense? You're way off on this Craig... You really are."
Look.. you need to take your blind glasses off and actually look at the suituation instead of looking at it through the "I love sarah" filter.. I am not an idiot and I'm not a hypocrite. Do I think that new builds around here are not the right stats.. yes. But the first thing I do with a new fighter is to try to fix their build.. so they start working the right way.. you did this with sarah except to raise her KO resist.. Is that my fault? NO! Was I offered anything from Sandmen to be stating my opinion which sides with Sandmen and is against you? NO! I urge you to re-look over the rule that is currently in place and I don't just mean browse over it.. I mean really look deep into it and see why I built it the way I did. All of my current posts give you a glimpse into what I was thinking about and how my idea works to combat the uneven issues.. the crack whorability of other ideas aswell as mine. look it all over. Understand why i came up with it.. what is the purpose of the idea? what does my idea do? why is my idea the best idea so far? And why isn't your idea able to be used? and FINALLY.. I need you to look over why I am not way off on this one. Kruze I know you've argued this a lot lately.. and dude I'm being honest here with you. You are getting nowhere with your arguement. I know if you back down now you probably will feel bad cause you lost this arguement.. but seriously man. i'm getting tired of argueing this point with you.. stop twisting the truth and look at the truth. What is best for the site. what is the best idea.. If you can find a better idea then great.. but currently what you have opposed my idea with is not better for the reasons which have already been laid out to you.
|
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on May 29, 2014 13:31:20 GMT -5
"You're my brother and I love you man... but you're an idiot and a hypocrite just like Sandman based on the first paragraph alone; IF you even believe that shit you just spewed. You've been arguing for months yourself now that the initial builds haven't been accurate, now you do an about face on it? What did Sandman offer you? A Fedor makeover? Yes, I have put 53 points into Sarah, BUT when those points were put in based on the idea that she was created accurately in the first place, then yah... some blame falls to Sandman for an inaccurate build. If a fighter has NEVER been KO'd in their career, then should that not constitute a a higher KO resistance? If a fighter has never submitted in there career, should that not constitute a high Sub Defense? You're way off on this Craig... You really are." Look.. you need to take your blind glasses off and actually look at the suituation instead of looking at it through the "I love sarah" filter.. I am not an idiot and I'm not a hypocrite. Do I think that new builds around here are not the right stats.. yes. But the first thing I do with a new fighter is to try to fix their build.. so they start working the right way.. you did this with sarah except to raise her KO resist.. Is that my fault? NO! Was I offered anything from Sandmen to be stating my opinion which sides with Sandmen and is against you? NO! I urge you to re-look over the rule that is currently in place and I don't just mean browse over it.. I mean really look deep into it and see why I built it the way I did. All of my current posts give you a glimpse into what I was thinking about and how my idea works to combat the uneven issues.. the crack whorability of other ideas aswell as mine. look it all over. Understand why i came up with it.. what is the purpose of the idea? what does my idea do? why is my idea the best idea so far? And why isn't your idea able to be used? and FINALLY.. I need you to look over why I am not way off on this one. Kruze I know you've argued this a lot lately.. and dude I'm being honest here with you. You are getting nowhere with your arguement. I know if you back down now you probably will feel bad cause you lost this arguement.. but seriously man. i'm getting tired of argueing this point with you.. stop twisting the truth and look at the truth. What is best for the site. what is the best idea.. If you can find a better idea then great.. but currently what you have opposed my idea with is not better for the reasons which have already been laid out to you. 1) There's actually no "I Love Sarah Filter" on this one dude. Yes, it so happens that she is in fact one of the few capped fighters in the league right now, BUT when this ridiculous 78 cap was introduced, she wasn't near that crappy cap yet. I've been pushing since caps were first discussed that the Women's cap should be at 80 not 78. Being able to readjust their points should be something that they are allowed to do because they're still working within the cap and aren't going over any points that they've already accumulated, there's no reason for a "drawback" here. These are supposed to be the best fighters in the division but, in most cases, they're not. 2) Your "idea" of delete a point to add a point from your cache is a complete waste of points; getting to use them to this point is irrelevant. Those are their points; their skills. Period. Why would you downgrade skills and knowledge already given or acquired? That's ridiculous. I've looked it over your "idea" numerous times dude and tried to see SOME actual benefit to it, and there is none. All it does is right now is keep Carano, Cyborg & Kaufman at the top and able to continue to grow while fighters like D'Alelio & Rousey, who just need tweaks (not an overhaul or diminish any of their already acquired skills) have to sit there and fester, losing fights they shouldn't be losing but the rest of the division continues to get to move past them, except that they're supposed to be among the top 2-3, and they're not. Maybe the men's divisions are a bit of different story because there's more parity, but the women's division is a mess from top to bottom. 3) There's no crackwhore-ability with raising the cap to where it should've been in the first place nor is it to be able to move their points around within what they've already been given. With the women's division atleast, it's a completely separated entity from the other weight classes since no women move up to LW, etcs. Yes there is a bit of an unbalance in the women's division right now, granted, but when the 2 highest rated/capped fighters in the division are still continually getting owned by what are effectively mid-tier and uncapped fighters AND only have ONE championship between the two of them to show for it, here's a BIG issue there, and it's not JUST how they were upgraded, it also has to do with the simulators little variables and affinity for strikers over ground fighters, etc. I take ownership of the way my fighters are fighting, and most of them are fighting the way they were designed, especially in Sarah's case, where offensively, she fights perfectly... the problem is, and I've said from the beginning when the caps were introduced, having the women's cap as low as it is does not allow for the fine tuning of any sort... hell, having a cap at all without knowing atleast knowing the fighter's overall doesn't allow for that either. 4) I am looking at the truth and what's best for the site. I always have been on this issue with the women's cap. The person twisting the truth here right now is Sandman with his bullshit that because they've been able to use these points to this point, is irrelevant for the reasons I've already stated; being able to redistribute points already given to them to put them to the cap isn't crack whoring... I don't even know what you're even meaning by that, cuz it's simply not fact. That being said, I'd be even amenable to a once a season shuffle or the paying of 1 point to drop 1 point from each attribute to re-distribute those points, even if it is as a one time thing for capped fighters, but dropping points and not being able to re-allocate them is complete waste. Honestly, what my biggest problem here now is the fact that most, not all, but most folks here voting have voted against ME and not the issue, which seems to be the case on most of these votes. Which is pretty sad people, cuz I am trying to make the site better, not only for myself, but for everyone... all you're seeing is that I have a fighter involved and figure I'm suggesting these things solely for my own benefit, which couldn't be more further from the truth. Yes, if I have an issue with something around here, chances are I'm being affected too... but why would I be doing it solely for my own benefit? What do I gain by that? Nothing except being able to enjoy the site a little more because I've been personally been so restricted for the last 3-4 seasons that it's going to take atleast that long, if not longer, to even be close to recovering from that; regardless of where my post count is at or that my fighters aren't performing well. Meanwhile, everyone else has been able to progress forward and improve. This just leaves me behind anyways. I never suggest any of this shit solely for my own benefit. Do I benefit from it as well as everyone else? Of course. Any suggestion that anyone makes, they're making because it benefits them as well... why else would you be suggesting it? her KO resistance can't be any more than 10-12 right now Oh, how little you know. lol. Then prove it. Cuz even if that was a low guesstimate, and considering your track record for builds, I have put 2 point into her KO Resistance that have been processed. So maybe she started at that level, and that puts her at 12 to MAYBE 15, but that still doesn't change the fact that her build for that stat was lower than it should have been based on her record. How fighters won their fights is just as important as how they lost them. |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 29, 2014 16:29:13 GMT -5
Oh, how little you know. lol. Then prove it. It's higher than 15. Since I know you create them in your own version of the game for tinkering, that is the most I will tell you. But it's definitely higher than 15. |
|
|
|
Post by xx - Former Phoenix Fight Club on May 29, 2014 17:24:28 GMT -5
It's higher than 15. Since I know you create them in your own version of the game for tinkering, that is the most I will tell you. But it's definitely higher than 15. I haven't opened that program since the last NBR bud. Keep phishing though... You still haven't proved that her KO Resistance is "higher than 15"; just saying it doesn't make it fact. lol If that's the case, kool... then I say that Brock is definitely champ... you need to change the champion banner and give me my point now! I said it, it has to be fact! :  |
|
|
|
Post by The Sandmen on May 29, 2014 17:56:27 GMT -5
Correct, when you say stupid things based on nothing, it's meaningless. When I tell you something based on what you asked me to research straight from the program, it's fact. I also like this whole, "I am Kruze, I make the most outragous claims in sim site history ("No one has anything better to do than re-sim over and over again so my no-name fighters lose forever"), and no proof is needed for that, but when someone presents you with actual fact, you just blither on about how the world should revolve around you.
Fun, but I have no more time for this silliness. You are wrong, and everyone in this thread agreed you were wrong, so move on. We're done here now.
|
|
= x2 (Rua, Liddel(current))
