StarGateWars Forums

What a ridiculous update ... let's all just increase our repulsion now.

what has admin been smoking to make him impliment this update
looks like a good way to frighten people like my self who barley understand ascended anyways from playing ascended

This is a terrible update either way..one of those that are against dynamic of ascended, challenges of building balanced account to defend yourself...
I will second Mathlord about the fact constant changes aren't needed in ascended (especially those favoring the non challenging), and RepliMagni about fact it wasn't discussed.
Throwing bad updates out of the sky, and not even clearly explained...

Cole wrote:Throwing bad updates out of the sky, and not even clearly explained...

You'd think we'd be used to it by now

Cole wrote:This is a terrible update either way..one of those that are against dynamic of ascended, challenges of building balanced account to defend yourself...
I will second Mathlord about the fact constant changes aren't needed in ascended (especially those favoring the non challenging), and RepliMagni about fact it wasn't discussed.
Throwing bad updates out of the sky, and not even clearly explained...

What's annoying is there are updates for ascended that nearly everyone wants and yet he said he hasn't had time to do them

I think this answers it all....


The above 2 items were introduced (or reinstated actually, in a way) to stop attackers from tying up potential attackers with pointless/no chance of success battles. If you take on a monster, you may get eaten.



only question is.. how does admin find out about stuff like "blocking" being done and super quickly throw updates (albiet what seem bad ones) at the problem. because I'm pretty sure it hasn't been brought up at any admin meets nor any forum threads... seems more like someone called in a favor!

I bet it was Kjarkur.

After all the unnecessary updates, all the closet target discussions and the bantering, you guys still don't get it? Admin will do as he pleases, not as we tell him is best.

Feri wrote:I think this answers it all....


The above 2 items were introduced (or reinstated actually, in a way) to stop attackers from tying up potential attackers with pointless/no chance of success battles. If you take on a monster, you may get eaten.

Still that it's not clear what the "some" means.

Feri wrote:only question is.. how does admin find out about stuff like "blocking" being done and super quickly throw updates (albiet what seem bad ones) at the problem. because I'm pretty sure it hasn't been brought up at any admin meets nor any forum threads... seems more like someone called in a favor!


I bet it was Kjarkur.

Kjarkur was away for a week in Ibiza and returned only two days ago. He was dormant in ascended while being away. Unless you claim he contacted admin (god knows how) while being in holidays?

Malx wrote:After all the unnecessary updates, all the closet target discussions and the bantering, you guys still don't get it? Admin will do as he pleases, not as we tell him is best.

This doesn't go in the line of the path of recent updates leading to dynamic playing and challenging ascended server where activity is rewarded, opposite to last year.

Simple solution, tomorrow is Friday, tomorrow is meet. Get as many as possible to state to admin why this is a bad update and i am sure he will change it. He may not remove it but he may tweek it.

Simple really. If after that he still doesn't then he's sealing his own fate.

if the attacker loses ALL their life force

It says ALL, so that would include reserves no? At least thats how I read it. Otherwise it would just say life force.

I reckon that it's very confushing as it stands there though. Anyone want to try it out? Catch me on MSN!
Somebody who's going to be on PPT for the coming days to be sure maybe...

Rodwolf wrote:if the attacker loses ALL their life force

It says ALL, so that would include reserves no? At least thats how I read it. Otherwise it would just say life force.

If ALL included reserves as well then if ALL their LF was gone what would be the "and then some"?

Clarkey wrote:

Rodwolf wrote:if the attacker loses ALL their life force

It says ALL, so that would include reserves no? At least thats how I read it. Otherwise it would just say life force.

If ALL included reserves as well then if ALL their LF was gone what would be the "and then some"?

true, but why put emphasis on it then?

Rodwolf wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Rodwolf wrote:if the attacker loses ALL their life force

It says ALL, so that would include reserves no? At least thats how I read it. Otherwise it would just say life force.

If ALL included reserves as well then if ALL their LF was gone what would be the "and then some"?

true, but why put emphasis on it then?

an even better question would be, why do we have to decifer a new update?
actually decifering wouldn't be so bad, but we have to test this to really know, and i don't think anyone wants to raise their hand and be the guinea pig here.

Rocky wrote:

Rodwolf wrote:

Clarkey wrote:

Rodwolf wrote:if the attacker loses ALL their life force

It says ALL, so that would include reserves no? At least thats how I read it. Otherwise it would just say life force.

If ALL included reserves as well then if ALL their LF was gone what would be the "and then some"?

true, but why put emphasis on it then?

an even better question would be, why do we have to decifer a new update?
actually decifering wouldn't be so bad, but we have to test this to really know, and i don't think anyone wants to raise their hand and be the guinea pig here.

No-one has to test it at all..... meet tomorrow, ask J, answer given. No testing required.

Plus if someone did test it's only 2 days descention.

stupid update -_- all my thoughts on this have been said already... as long as lots of ppl slap admin tomorrow at the meet he may see the light... may...