All right Riipiin, I'll admit it it, I don't know a client 194 revision from a 465, from now on I'll just say the year the revision was in and go with that. Though I think it does make sense for even the 317 to have done it the way that seems most logical to me anyways.
Still, attempting to correct a notion on a game mechanic with game realism in mind and saying, mainly this stall thieving ability that any stall is first come first serve really shows fantastical fanatical idealism in a game mechanic that, I'll repeat what I said earlier in this topic, flies in the face of quality assurance.
You are right about the gem stall, though. I can imagine that stall watchers would compete to see who could steal from that stall first on a respawn.
But if all stalls back then only allowed one person and only one person to extract goods from any one stall, there would be old guides out there in the web archive specifically stating stalls are piss poor training methods because of this mechanic.
The fast respawn stalls seem notorious for allowing any amount of trainers on them getting the goods on simultaneous steals. If a simultaneous steal was the way it was done for all stalls it also wouldn't make sense for the programmers to segregate any other stall in prevent the more valuable stalls in this same fashion of injecting valuable resources in to the economy unless the player bots to do so. More lines of code makes the engine a bit larger. It is much easier to program a skill mechanic the same in a scope of a training option.
From here on down, for the sake of not picking out Riipiin (he's a prime example of this, but the world has plenty other people that do this) I hereby speak on regard to those that are an excuse to language expression, oral or written composition, in any forum or social setting of anything else below this statement.
Next time before you make a statement like that, type it up and look at what you just typed. Don't post it right away, read it and think to yourself on a few things: is this really right, would this have worked that way, does common sense say this is how it is/was, in logic for realistic implements would this have been a successful at the time, did any tip site in the past back this up. I'll admit it, my suggestions on what to think about in stating suggestions rehash themselves, but I expand similar points in some of the successive check suggestions because there's chaotic speculation, and then there's reasoning using logic.
Oh, while you can correct yourself after the fact of defense in saying "It was an opinion!" or "I didn't say it was fact!" or "Don't take it so seriously!" hours after to make up for yourself, it shows lack of articulation in whatever language your composing such things and makes your reputation of such, or anyone's reputation on a forum as lazy and lacking observed qualities downgrading any other feature of a person may show of productive ability in other speculative situation. Sound forum posting etiquette on regular basis shows you know how to write up concise points. How many times does the staff, potential veterans, and the very likable forum contributors correct themselves on any post they make to defend their posts on what they typed if someone makes accusation that their post initially sounds stated at a fact that really was an opinion? I remember Riipiin doing this infrequently, but it was done often enough.
That goes out to anyone that thinks they are above this whole point and think they are holier than thou. does not apply to "me", thinks Garnu is a social nazi and needs some good meds to calm him down, or I, [insert forum name], do not give a flying flip how bad I make myself look in simple writing composition, I'm totally humble but I still have to defend myself and correct my obvious mistakes once again showing that I contradict myself often (that is what it comes out to be when people make a fool out of themselves, I may have stated contradiction in that last observation but it shows what I think posters don't say because it really incriminates them).
Topic: Calling out a Know It All (Read 8349 times)