This high idea about yourself though comes as a surprise because we have played together in a PL game and you were part of my coalition with Mark and you played so bad we could not believe it.
I also seem to remember another match....that North American map one....where you and I were not on the same team. And I had to fight tooth and nail to gain ground in a losing war where I only had one ally at my side while our third was largely absent. And yet, the two of us who remained gave about five other players the bloodiest nose they've ever had. Even that Clownpunk, or whatever he calls himself, was nearly wiped out by my armies and your pal, Mark (whom I've got nothing bad to say about) was able to take advantage of the situation and, I think managed to win the last season in large part because of that huge match.
In a way, Mark owes me for helping him to win the league since I pretty much kept Clownpunk and his allies from taking over the whole American west. The fact that the three of them (and a couple others aligned with them) were still not enough to take me out until the match was nearly over just goes to show how wrong you are about me. But then, what else is new?
Oh, and one more thing....if I played so "bad", how on earth could I have top-level stats when there are lots of other players who've played just as long as me and many more matches than me who're not even close to my ranking, nor my stats, for that matter?
Moreover, i can not remember when i said that i had problem with gold users etc? i still do not understand why discussing about research when there are more important problems of the game like implementing changes that help starting or mediocre players have a chance and support gold using without compensation for loyal users.
But, you say there are bigger fish to fry than the research issue which -- in your estimation -- isn't even an issue. To you, and to any detractors, I say only that if the devs focus on only a single issue at a time, then they'd never get anything done. Their staff is big enough to take on more than one topic or problem. And it's up to them to make the ultimate decisions about which tasks have higher priority than others.
And if they only ever fixed things that are broken, then they'd never EVER get around to adding new features because there'll ALWAYS be broken things in the code. That's a simple fact of any large development. A fix for one problem leads to three other problems, one of which is old but hasn't been discovered, yet; one that is new but exists because the conditions for which a function relied upon have changed; and one that is entirely new and only exists because a mistake was made elsewhere during the implementation of the "fix".
That's just the plague of code development. And as much as I'm a stickler for following code libraries and using responsible forms of Agile development, there will always be flaws in the system because human beings are not perfect no matter how thoroughly they use test cases and flawless coding practices, etc. That's human nature. That doesn't mean they don't explore potential changes....especially ones that are well-founded ideas like mine.
I'm not opposed to stats, etc. What I'm opposed to is a total disregard to rank as well as to creative contributions. Unlike some users, I actually posit some pretty good ideas for improving the game, as well as some very-well-thought out solutions to known problems. You see, not only am I a genius, but I'm actually a programmer with a degree in Software Engineering. I 've studied application development, and I've developed entire suites of applications. I'm also a lifelong strategy gamer and extremely keen on how gaming works on many many levels of play.
You know what? If you want to try to one-up me, then why don't you tell me just how much experience YOU have in this area and how much YOU could contribute to the creative community. In the meantime, if you happen to come up with a good idea to improve the game, I might just find myself endorsing it. But just because you don't like one of my ideas doesn't mean you've gotta pick apart every bit of my ideas. A constructive critique is welcome. A carefully-thought-out deconstruction of one of my ideas is fine too. But simply using straw man arguments like "there's more important things to do" won't fly with me.
I've got no personal issues with you. I hope you don't try to elevate this to a personal level. I'm an INTJ. If you make a sound argument, I will consider it and show you the due respect that you will have earned in making that argument...even if I disagree with your conclusions. But if you just say "this is this" or "that is that" for no valid reason, then I'm going to totally disregard your reasoning, altogether.
In conclusion, I'll leave you with this quote from Harlan Ellison.
Oh, and if you want to know what an INTJ is, it's one of the 16 natural personality types that people can be classified under. Here's an excerpt about the INTJ type from Personality Max, one of many personality typing (Jung, MBTI, etc.) websites that can help you to understand your own -- and others' -- personality.You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.
- The INTJ personality type is nicknamed the "Strategist" and belongs to the NT Intellectual temperament. INTJs are private, independent and self-confident. They strive for perfection and achievement. They are gifted strategists with analytical, conceptual and objective minds. They are flexible and like to formulate contingency plans. Strategists are able to see the reasons behind things.
It seemed like such a waste to destroy an entire battle station just to eliminate one man. But Charlie knew that it was the only way to ensure the absolute and total destruction of Quasi-duck, once and for all.
The saying, "beating them into submission until payday", is just golden...pun intended.