721 replies to this topic

[MustrumRidcully]

Lord of All, on 15 July 2013 - 05:44 PM, said:

Yeah. you can't boat!

Take a K2. Any Hunchback. A Cataphract. Just anything without DHS.

You remenber what happened in Closed Beta? People took their mechs, removed weapons or downgraded weapons, and added heat sinks or increased the engine size. Mechs were too hot.

[jeffsw6]

Pht, on 16 July 2013 - 12:32 PM, said:

I honestly don't see the advantage of having to scratch-build a balancing patch/system when an entire usable system has been given to us that has 30 years of balancing work on it already done.

You keep making this claim, but you forget to say, "with random cone-of-fire mechanics, outside of first-person-shooter environments."

[Pht]

jeffsw6, on 16 July 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

You keep making this claim, but you forget to say, "with random cone-of-fire mechanics, outside of first-person-shooter environments."

I'm not forgetting to say it.

I don't like nor care for the cone of fire mechanics and I don't advocate them as a fix. I also don't think that the MW video game genre is an FPS/Shooter genre.

The MW genre is about first-person realtime combat in an armored combat unit that performs in combat as their namesakes do in the BT lore/setting.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 16 July 2013 - 01:20 PM, said:

I'm not forgetting to say it.

I don't like nor care for the cone of fire mechanics and I don't advocate them as a fix. I also don't think that the MW video game genre is an FPS/Shooter genre.

The MW genre is about first-person realtime combat in an armored combat unit that performs in combat as their namesakes do in the BT lore/setting.

care to explain how rolling dice for hit locations ISN'T random? unless maybe you always played with loaded dice, but that is generally not a basic assumption most make.

[Pht]

blinkin, on 16 July 2013 - 02:01 PM, said:

care to explain how rolling dice for hit locations ISN'T random?

If you reveal what you mean by "random" I will. The word is used to mean different things.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 16 July 2013 - 02:05 PM, said:

If you reveal what you mean by "random" I will. The word is used to mean different things.

a set of 1-6 where you cannot accurately predict the outcome of any given roll. so you also cannot predict the target of any given shot since hit locations are based on DICE ROLLS. nor can you accurately determine whether any given shot will hit anything since to hit rolls are also based on dice.

a system where it is possible for even the most skilled player to dump all of his ammo at a single target and miss every shot.

that is what i mean by "random". ya know the stuff table top uses.

[AndyHill]

Random as in based on probabilities due to a certain (and well known) algorithm. Note that although weapon values do have some connection to this algorithm, heat, weight etc. also contain a largely closed system where weapons are balanced between each other. That actually only leaves the dice throwing vs. mouse aiming as well as movement as the difference between the simulator and the tabletop. There are also mechanisms like projectile speed, beam duration and missile guidance at play.

Managing these specific differences is important, because through them we create the transition from tabletop to real-time simulation, not by screwing with the numbers. In fact, since the weapon balance is carefully thought out between the parameters, it is almost impossible to mess with the numbers and not break the balance. With a random stabs in the dark -approach that seems to be the case in MWO, we can forget the almost part of it.

Also this transition is not a mystery thing for wizards to dream about. Here's my take on the issues in MWO:

- Pinpoint alpha strikes - this would destroy the tabletop gameplay as well being completely incompatible with segmented hit locations based damage system - and makes weapon balancing just about impossible
-- This issue is made worse by the extremely front loaded heat balance (high cap, low dissipation)
-- This issue is again made worse by coolant flush

- Closely related to the former; too much pinpoint ability for the weapons. Single projectiles with a lot of hitting power, short duration of laser beams.

- Again related to both previous issues; massive burst firepower due to hugely shortened cycle times for weapons.

- As a result of the former, the game runs entirely too hot, making balanced builds difficult to build to be effective, forcing people to load as much double heatsinks as possible and focus on a single weapon type

- The ratio of armor vs single weapon's single shot hitting power is quite high, making it less rewarding to expose oneself and achieve firing solutions for just one shot from one weapon.

- Heat is accumulated instantly, making it very hard to implement heat penalties in a real-time controllable way (for example heat inertia or the system proposed in the OP would already improve this a lot), so it's hard for heat as a mechanism to provide its true function in enriching decision making processes during battles. Note that unlike MWO designers seem to believe, heat does not limit firepower in the tabletop game. Size, weight, ammo requirements and heat do.

If you look at all the above points it's quite obvious that MWO's gameplay is purpose built for pinpoint alpha boating, which is unfortunately the exact polar opposite of what it should be. For the BTech-style segmented hitpoint system to work, the system should provide a sizable challenge for the player to hit specific components on the enemy 'mechs. MWO has done precisely nothing to stop that. Well there are no factory installed aimbots, I'll give them that much credit.

After the gameplay has been designed to fit the general idea of BTech, the numbers will probably need some tweaking. But as far as MWO goes, I think that in the beginning when PGI inserted BTech numbers into their gameplay, didn't like the results and started messing with the numbers on a massive scale the numbers themselves were actually the least of the problems.

Edited by AndyHill, 16 July 2013 - 04:53 PM.

[DarkJaguar]

Okay, So I made a spreadsheet up depicting the values I had discussed in my opening post. One interesting change I made was to reduce the Heat cap from heatsinks on DHS from 2/HS to 1/HS in line with SHS. The 2DHS cap was allowing for some pretty out there scenarios where a mech with 10DHS was able to alpha strike 6 Large Lasers without penalty.

Feel free to post your builds to help me assess the system and any tweaks that need be made, try and break it (without recoding it)!

Table Top to Real Time Weapons Calculator.

Edited by DarkJaguar, 17 July 2013 - 11:32 AM.

[Pht]

blinkin, on 16 July 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

a set of 1-6 where you cannot accurately predict the outcome of any given roll.

I'll presume by "accurately" you mean "can't tell the exact number you'll get every single time under all circumstances."

To which I say ... so what? why care?

This is called a hit percentage, and the hit percentage modifier used in any given situation is intutive and models for how conditions affect your 'mechs ability to get it's weapons aligned; and you can choose which hit percentage is used by your own playstyle choices.

IE: you run really fast while overheating and try to make a shot. Therefore, the hit percentage goes down. slow down, cool off, hit percentages go up.

Or, in short, the 'mech is actually modeled in the game.

Quote

so you also cannot predict the target of any given shot since hit locations are based on DICE ROLLS.

Unless by "target" you mean "the exact armor panel/section that will be hit, you're wrong. In the TT and in the lore you can choose where your shots will cluster. Aim center front, get center front and directly around it with most of your shots. Aim high, hit high, use an advanced targeting computer, aim for a specific location, more of your shots hit that location ... shoot at an immobile target, more of your stuff hits the exact section, etc.

Quote

nor can you accurately determine whether any given shot will hit anything since to hit rolls are also based on dice.

Now you're just engaging in insulting and ignorant hyperbole. It is possible, by human player choices, to drive the cumulative to-hit numbers down to 3 and 2, 90%+ and 100% of shots hitting, respectively.

Anyone who's played the TT knows that once you get a the roll down to a 5 or a 6 your hit probabilities are good to go.

Quote

a system where it is possible for even the most skilled player to dump all of his ammo at a single target and miss every shot.

Johny, if you don't go to sleep, the DICE BOOGEYMAN will get you!

Quote

that is what i mean by "random". ya know the stuff table top uses.

All you've managed to do is show ignorance of the TT combat system.

It seems to me you don't want a first person real time armored combat simulator. You do indeed appear to want just another FPS.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 17 July 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

I'll presume by "accurately" you mean "can't tell the exact number you'll get every single time under all circumstances."

To which I say ... so what? why care?

This is called a hit percentage, and the hit percentage modifier used in any given situation is intutive and models for how conditions affect your 'mechs ability to get it's weapons aligned; and you can choose which hit percentage is used by your own playstyle choices.

IE: you run really fast while overheating and try to make a shot. Therefore, the hit percentage goes down. slow down, cool off, hit percentages go up.

Or, in short, the 'mech is actually modeled in the game.



Unless by "target" you mean "the exact armor panel/section that will be hit, you're wrong. In the TT and in the lore you can choose where your shots will cluster. Aim center front, get center front and directly around it with most of your shots. Aim high, hit high, use an advanced targeting computer, aim for a specific location, more of your shots hit that location ... shoot at an immobile target, more of your stuff hits the exact section, etc.



Now you're just engaging in insulting and ignorant hyperbole. It is possible, by human player choices, to drive the cumulative to-hit numbers down to 3 and 2, 90%+ and 100% of shots hitting, respectively.

Anyone who's played the TT knows that once you get a the roll down to a 5 or a 6 your hit probabilities are good to go.



Johny, if you don't go to sleep, the DICE BOOGEYMAN will get you!



All you've managed to do is show ignorance of the TT combat system.

It seems to me you don't want a first person real time armored combat simulator. You do indeed appear to want just another FPS.

it seems you don't want an actual conversation you just want to ridicule anyone who doesn't completely agree with your "real time armored combat simulator" that you never bother to explain. you do indeed appear to want to say your system works just cuz.


if you take all of the dice and turn based aspects out of a game that is turn based and relies heavily on dice, then at some point you need to make a concession or two.

Edited by blinkin, 17 July 2013 - 12:37 PM.

[Pht]

blinkin, on 17 July 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

it seems you don't want an actual conversation you just want to ridicule anyone who doesn't completely agree...

Says the person who's been following me on the forums on this particular issue ever since I dared to agree with you and than ask you to do what you said should be done; interact about the particular problems at hand.

Quote

...with your "real time armored combat simulator" that you never bother to explain.

I've explained it. Quite fully. And linked the explanation in my sig.

Quote

you do indeed appear to want to say your system works just cuz.

Ironic, considering I've been all but begging people to actually demonstrate their claims of why it won't work.

Quote

if you take all of the dice and turn based aspects out of a game that is turn based and relies heavily on dice, then at some point you need to make a concession or two.

Strawman.

I've already stated that the form of the TT rules don't always work in realtime first-person. I bet I could even find myself posting this from before you even joined these forums. Heck, I bet I could find myself saying such from mektek's forums from around 2004.

[DarkJaguar]

OP is now updated to have a link to the Experimental 3TRT Weapons Calculator.

[jeffsw6]

Pht, on 17 July 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

I've already stated that the form of the TT rules don't always work in realtime first-person. I bet I could even find myself posting this from before you even joined these forums. Heck, I bet I could find myself saying such from mektek's forums from around 2004.

My problem with you, Pht, is you continue to advocate a simple change of damage, heat, and RoF numbers without stating what you think must be done to address the huge pin-point alpha problems. You barely agree the problem would still exist if TT values were used, and you have never stated what mechanic you believe would be acceptable.

All you do is cry for TT values without being honest and telling players if you want a cone-of-fire, random dice roll, etc.

[blinkin]

Pht, on 17 July 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Says the person who's been following me on the forums on this particular issue ever since I dared to agree with you and than ask you to do what you said should be done; interact about the particular problems at hand.



I've explained it. Quite fully. And linked the explanation in my sig.



Ironic, considering I've been all but begging people to actually demonstrate their claims of why it won't work.



Strawman.

I've already stated that the form of the TT rules don't always work in realtime first-person. I bet I could even find myself posting this from before you even joined these forums. Heck, I bet I could find myself saying such from mektek's forums from around 2004.

and you take away all of the interesting aspects and give them all over to the computer. if we are just babysitting an aim bot then of course you can keep most of the dice rules without repercussions. i am not really interested in a game that basically plays itself, simulator or otherwise.

jeffsw6, on 17 July 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

My problem with you, Pht, is you continue to advocate a simple change of damage, heat, and RoF numbers without stating what you think must be done to address the huge pin-point alpha problems. You barely agree the problem would still exist if TT values were used, and you have never stated what mechanic you believe would be acceptable.

All you do is cry for TT values without being honest and telling players if you want a cone-of-fire, random dice roll, etc.

no he does address these things in his weapons system. it is the first link in his signature. basically he hands all aiming over to the computer and the pilots job is to push a button.

cone of fire would give far more control to the player than his system.

Edited by blinkin, 17 July 2013 - 01:28 PM.

[jeffsw6]

blinkin, on 17 July 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

no he does address these things in his weapons system. it is the first link in his signature. basically he hands all aiming over to the computer and the pilots job is to push a button.

But he goes on posting "TT values TT values" without stating that in his posts. It is not helpful.

[blinkin]

jeffsw6, on 17 July 2013 - 01:34 PM, said:

But he goes on posting "TT values TT values" without stating that in his posts. It is not helpful.

i was giving him far more credit before than i should have before i read that.

honestly i like TT values they make for a very good STARTING POINT, but when transferred to any sort of fun gameplay where a player has a single mech to operate some things get lost in translation.

TT was designed for top down tactical gameplay where the player has multiple units to operate. as a result controls were simplified in some cases to avoid bogging down gameplay. when you limit the player to operating one mech directly an effort should be made to bring back more of the direct control otherwise the pilot will simply not have enough to do and everything will be boring.

Edited by blinkin, 17 July 2013 - 01:48 PM.

[Pht]

jeffsw6, on 17 July 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

My problem with you, Pht, is you continue to advocate a simple change of damage, heat, and RoF numbers without stating what you think must be done to address the huge pin-point alpha problems.

*cough*

Pht, on 29 November 2011 - 04:43 PM, said:

How well a 'Mech can converge (concentrate its weapons fire into any given area) a single or all of its weapons onto a target.

This is the thing that's really been messed up in MW video games. It seems developers have so far thought that the pilots are the major factor in how well a 'Mech can converge it's weapons - which is wrong. Getting every weapon to hit a single section of a targeted 'Mech is a HARDWARE thing in the BTUniverse. Namely, if you don't have an Advanced Targeting Computer, your 'Mech won't be able to get its weapon or weapons to hit exactly what section you're aiming at on mobile targets. The advanced TC will be discussed a bit further down. There ARE also a set of hit-location tables that DO represent raw Mechwarrior Gunnery skill - the Called Shot tables. Those are discussed too. Also if a target is immobile any 'Mech, with or without an advanced TC, will be able to get more of it's weapons to concentrate onto a single area of a targeted 'Mech; this is an Aimed Shot.

BESIDES the Called Shot hit location tables that represent the pilot's gunnery skill, these hit-location tables represent the combat performance of THE BATTLEMECH.

So let's have an example; I'll work this out for a shot to the center of mass of the front of a targeted 'Mech.

Remember, this is just expressing the ability of the 'Mech to converge one or all of its weapons onto the area of the targeted 'Mech that the pilot has indicated, not weapons or pilot performance; and this is only for shots that have ALREADY been determined to have hit the targeted 'Mech.

The Basic hit-location table
This first set represents keeping the the reticule on the center of mass ("chest") of the front of the target 'Mech:

There's a 13.89% or 5 out of 36 chance of hitting the right arm
There's a 13.89% or 5 out of 36 chance of hitting the left arm
There's a 11.11% or 1 out of 9 chance of hitting the right leg
There's a 11.11% or 1 out of 9 chance of hitting the left leg
There's a 13.89% or 5 out of 36 chance of hitting the right torso
There's a 13.89% or 5 out of 36 chance of hitting the left torso
There's a 16.67% or 1 out of 6 chance of hitting the center torso
There's a 2.78% or 1 out of 36 chance of hitting the cockpit

What do all these percentages mean in the game? Well, in the DB, they're just pure numbers in a math equation, but for the player it could be expressed visually in the game manual or in training missions in color coded zones across the target to show how shots will concentrate, depending on what you're aiming at, so people could get a feeling for the combat capability of their 'Mech; and this would go for every type of hit-location table.

Here's the table that gives the data that the above is derived from:



And here's the hit-location table for 'Mechs lying on the ground (or quad 'Mechs):



Called Shot hit-location tables

These are the tables that represent how well a 'Mech's pilot can get their 'Mech to get it to put it's weapons fire into a smaller area of a targeted 'Mech. There are two tables: Call high-low, and Call left-right. Attempting to make a Called Shot adds another +3 to the to-hit number that must be overcome. This means that less of your shots will hit, but those that do hit will concentrate into a smaller area.

In game play terms, you "activate" the called-shot hit-location tables by aiming at specific parts of your target. For example, to use the "aim high" Called Shot table, you'd aim at the target's cockpit, neck, or extreme upper torso.

Called high:
There's a 16.67% or 1 out of 6 chance of hitting the:
Left or right arm, Left, right, or center front torsos, or the cockpit.

(Yes, this means that if anyone tells you that if you that if you aim at his cockpit, you can hit his foot ... they're wrong.)

Called Low:
A 33.34% chance of hitting the right leg
A 33.34% chance of hitting the left leg
A 16.67% or 1 out of 6 chance of hitting the right torso
A 16.67% or 1 out of 6 chance of hitting the left torso

Here's the table for Called Shots aimed high/aimed low.



For Called Shots Left or Right:
You use the normal hit-tables, except you have a +3 modifier, and you use the column one section over from where you would normally aim... for instance, if you call a shot left against a target standing directly in front of you ("in your front arc"), facing you , you use the "left" column on the basic hit table.



This table is used for calling shots Left/Right against a mech with it's front facing directly at you or it's back facing directly at you.

If your target's left or right side is facing you, and you want to aim left/right you use the Advanced hit table, posted above (which gives you a chance to hit their rear torsos).

It should be very obvious by now that the hit-location tables are VERY important. In fact, there is good reason to use the tables we already have as a standard baseline to construct more hit-tables to account for some situations which crop up in the video game format.

Aimed Shots

An Aimed shot is the occasion when a 'Mech without an advanced Targeting Computer can actually target specific locations against a target. Without a TC Aimed shots are only possible versus immobile targets, and only direct fire weapons and non-cluster ammunition types are usable for this.

The to-hit modifier for an immobile target is -4 (-5 if you have a TC) if you try and target any part other than the cockpit; cockpit aimed shots have a +3 to-hit modifier (A TC does not affect the cockpit to-hit). After it is determined how many of your shots connect, all weapons that roll a 6, 7, or 8 on 2d6 hit the location you've chosen. If you don't roll a 6,7, or 8 you don't automatically hit the specific location you aimed for. Instead, you roll on the appropriate normal hit-location table (yes, this can result in hitting the section you targeted anyways).

A 'Mech is considered immobile if it is shut down, it's pilot is unconscious, if it is bracing an arm to try and make a hard shot, if it is hooked to a coolant truck, or is having it's ammo reloaded. Quad 'Mechs that have lost 3 or 4 legs are considered immobile. A bipedal 'Mech that has lost both legs and both arms is considered immobile. "Immobile" equates to a unit not being able to move on it's own at all.

The Advanced Targeting Computer

This bit of hardware is a game-changer. It is a HIGH reward for big tradeoffs piece of hardware. Besides subtracting 1 from virtually all to-hit modifiers (including those for Called Shots), it allows your 'Mech to actually target specific locations on a mobile target!

A TC consists of an advanced computer that is far more powerful than the standard BattleMech T&T suite - it is able to adjust for many more variables far more quickly. A TC is not just an advanced computer suite, it also employs recoil compensators, gyroscopic stabilizers, and other hardware attached to the various direct-fire weapons systems mounted in a 'Mech. These components help to overcome weapons drift, muzzle recoil on kinetic weapons, and any erratic targeting inputs induced by the MechWarrior. The size and weight of a TC is directly proportional to the weight of all 'Mech-scale heavy weapons it is connected to. Inner Sphere TC's equal the total weapons weight divided by four, clan TC's divide by 5, and both take up a number of criticals (internal spaces) equal to the calculated tonnage of the TC (rounding up at half tons). Yes, they can get VERY heavy and large quite quickly... no free lunches!

In gameplay, having a TC allows you to make an Aimed Shot (not to be confused with a Called Shot) against *mobile* targets. The differences between a normal Aimed Shot vs an Immobile target and an Aimed Shot against a mobile target using a TC is that there is a +3 to-hit modifier, and it is not possible to target the cockpit on a mobile target. Otherwise, all of the other rules for an Aimed Shot apply. If my wonky math is correct, that's about 1 out of 4 shots that "make" their to-hit number will hit what you've aimed at, on average, which doesn't sound like much, until you consider that the best odds you can normally get otherwise are 1 out of 6 vs the center torso, or to hit a leg, when calling a shot low (when virtually all there IS to hit is a leg!). In practice, TC aimed shots vs mobile targets are very useful for chiseling a specific part off.

Using a TC to make a shot vs a specific location in game requires turning this function on. With this function off, a 'Mech with a TC behaves just like a 'Mech without one, except you have the advantage of a -1 to-hit modifier for most direct fire weapons types in the vast majority of situations.

You were saying ... ?

[Pht]

blinkin, on 17 July 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

and you take away all of the interesting aspects and give them all over to the computer.

So, you don't want a game that simulates mech combat in a game about mech combat?

Quote

if we are just babysitting an aim bot...

Amazing how this:

Quote

Gunnery skill in a BTU BattleMech consists of several physical and mental skills.

Physically, the main skill is the use of a joystick to indicate and track the desired target that one wants their 'Mech to try and hit, and the ability to pull trigger(s) exactly when necessary without disturbing one's aim. The joystick controls a firing reticule which is displayed on the main HUD in the cockpit. BTU 'Mechs are, by design, not allowed to target or track anything with the reticule or choose to shoot any weapon! Minor physical skills consist of the use of mode switches and, for example, configuring Target Interlock Circuits on the fly.

The three most important Mental gunnery skills are:

Knowing how the internal heat levels in your 'Mech will affect it's ability to aim, knowing if your 'Mech can make the shot you're indicating to it, and if you think it can make the shot, how long to let your 'Mech's Targeting and Tracking (T&T) computers calculate lead (weapons convergence) in order to hit the target being indicated and tracked by you. The decision on when to shoot or not shoot and how long let your T&T work on "a fix" is affected by other factors, which a good MechWarrior will take into account.

These factors consist of:
Choosing what weapons should be fired based on their rated battlefield ranges in relation to the distance to the target;

Knowing how the varying environmental and terrain types your 'Mech or a target is in will affect your 'Mech's ability to make the shot;

Choosing when to shoot based upon the target's behavior, for example, waiting until the target is relatively "still" enough in relation to your 'Mech's firing arc so that your 'Mech has an easier time making the shot;

Choosing what sort of movement you will be engaging in while asking your 'Mech to make a shot, for example, standing still while shooting, or running and shooting;

Choosing what types of weapons to fire based on their differing performance parameters i.e. ACs vs Gauss weapons, or pulse lasers vs normal lasers;

Choosing what types of ammo to use for ammo using weapons i.e., when to use LBX Cluster rounds vs LBX AC rounds;

Choosing firing modes for some weapons, for example, attempting to fire normal AC's in rapid fire mode, or rate of fire for Rotary ACs;

Knowing when engaging in an advanced firing mode is worth the tradeoff it requires (for instance, bracing an arm requires you to be immobile; Called Shots are harder to connect with, etc);

Knowing how the damage your 'Mech has taken will affect it's ability to make a shot (weapons can be degraded by taking damage, weapons in damaged arms might not align properly).

is now somehow distorted by you into a description of babysitting an aimbot?

You appear to have a very abnormal definition of what an aimbot is. Aimbots mean you have to interact less. The above makes you interact MORE.

Quote

...then of course you can keep most of the dice rules without repercussions. i am not really interested in a game that basically plays itself, simulator or otherwise.

Now if only you'd bother to argue against something other than a strawman in your mind. Maybe, say, honestly interact with what I've posted.

Or will you still let your grudge against me for agreeing with you and asking you to do what you said should be done distort everything I post?

Quote

no he does address these things in his weapons system. it is the first link in his signature. basically he hands all aiming over to the computer and the pilots job is to push a button.

Lie.

blinkin, on 17 July 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

honestly i like TT values they make for a very good STARTING POINT, but when transferred to any sort of fun gameplay where a player has a single mech to operate some things get lost in translation.

So, if I dare to ask you what and why, exactly, about transferring them, gets lost in the translation... will you actually answer?

Quote

TT was designed for top down tactical gameplay where the player has multiple units to operate. as a result controls were simplified in some cases to avoid bogging down gameplay.

Which is why in the conversion to first-person realtime you add in most all of the advanced rules that make things more complex.

Quote

when you limit the player to operating one mech directly an effort should be made to bring back more of the direct control otherwise the pilot will simply not have enough to do and everything will be boring.

... and can you list these things that the mechwarrior directly controls in the lore that are left out in converting the tt combat mechanic into first-person realtime? Is there something more here than just a claim?

Edited by Pht, 17 July 2013 - 04:52 PM.

[I am]

The novel's you gents write... that will never be read. Can you include more pictures please?

[Unbound Inferno]

I am, on 17 July 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

The novel's you gents write... that will never be read. Can you include more pictures please?

If you mean PGi is included won't read it because of that - it is a sad bit of information to substantiate rationale as to why this game can never be balanced properly.