|
|
Rank: Ithorian Scout
Groups: Member
Joined: 2/10/2010
Posts: 6
|
Sorry about the topic heading, I didn't realize I was waving a stick at people. My bad :-). I meant nothing untoward, I just wanted to know if it was feasible to add a new filter option for Squad Builder. (Heading should have read "Can we add a filter for building with only the actual sets" or "I was trying to build a commando squad and spent half an hour looking for a Lt. Page for sale on the internet sites before realizing he was a custom!") My group doesn't really pay attention to whats going on with the V-sets, and only four of us actually have minis of our own; we pool together. We just use the game as an excuse to get together once a month and get nerdy for 8 hours, as we don't see much of each other anymore.
There is no way they would let me play with Page anyway. "Squad Cover and Twin? For your Super Stealth Commandos? Hah! Keep dreaming Brent! By the way, Infestation!"
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 812
Location: Parkville, MD
|
billiv15 wrote:swinefeld wrote:NO MORE Pro vs Anti V-set nonsense.
Most of this topic has been about squad builder feature suggestions. Stick to that topic.
I agree with the first, don't agree with the second statement. Most of this thread were people poking at the V-sets for unrelated issues to the topic. Heck, even the topic heading is a poke. Now as to no more of it, I agree. I'm so sick of this. We were a-holes for not having it on bloomilk, now the same people are crabby because it is here. Can't win for losing. Incorrect. The same people are not being crabby about it being here. Different people are complaining this time. Lumping in everyone together is silly. While the topic heading may be not be worded the best way, it is not necessarily a poke at the set itself. That may be the perception of an individual who does not read the OP's first post very carefully though.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/4/2008
Posts: 1,441
|
Eroschilles wrote:billiv15 wrote:swinefeld wrote:NO MORE Pro vs Anti V-set nonsense.
Most of this topic has been about squad builder feature suggestions. Stick to that topic.
I agree with the first, don't agree with the second statement. Most of this thread were people poking at the V-sets for unrelated issues to the topic. Heck, even the topic heading is a poke. Now as to no more of it, I agree. I'm so sick of this. We were a-holes for not having it on bloomilk, now the same people are crabby because it is here. Can't win for losing. Incorrect. The same people are not being crabby about it being here. Different people are complaining this time. Lumping in everyone together is silly. While the topic heading may be not be worded the best way, it is not necessarily a poke at the set itself. That may be the perception of an individual who does not read the OP's first post very carefully though. I guess that depends on your reading of new posters. I tend to fall with history, that odds are, a brand new poster commenting on this topic, isn't a new poster. You are assuming otherwise. Neither view can be proven as of yet, but to state with certainty, "different people" does not take into account history of discussion on this topic. Given history, I am much more likely to be correct than you :)
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 812
Location: Parkville, MD
|
I doubt everyone who posted was the same individual.
Even if a poster is a recurring account, as has happened in the past, the new account is not always the person you think it is. Sometimes it is actually a new person. Also, I think it creates tension when people are accused of multi-accounting because they agreee with each other.
History has also shown that problem posters do not cause a problem until someone goes poking at their bees' nest first. I find erring on the side of caution to be the most prudent course of action. Let's assume everyone on the board is an honest individual until proven otherwise, not vis versa. That is to say not to give people leeway to do whatever they want or to be left unguarded, but to give people the benefit of the doubt.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 256
|
Getting off topic again.
Let's make it simple, the request is for a feature that would allow you to exclude a particular set or class of set from your list of available figures.
It's been suggested that the feature might be made more useful if it's available for all sets.
If you have any further suggestions on how to handle the feature, or how to improve the feature, let's hear it.
If you have any further input on why the feature is a good idea, or how it could be used, let's hear it.
If you have any further input on how to produce such a feature with the current system, let's hear it.
If you have any comments about the quality of a particular set, or the credibility of a particular poster, don't bother posting.
To throw in my two cents, I'd like to see this coupled with the addition of special scenario figures that WotC produced. So you could make use of those figures in leisure play or when putting together a reference sheet for those scenarios, while easily excluding them when building tournament armies.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/2/2008
Posts: 538
Location: GC, Missouri
|
Eroschilles wrote:billiv15 wrote:swinefeld wrote:NO MORE Pro vs Anti V-set nonsense.
Most of this topic has been about squad builder feature suggestions. Stick to that topic.
I agree with the first, don't agree with the second statement. Most of this thread were people poking at the V-sets for unrelated issues to the topic. Heck, even the topic heading is a poke. Now as to no more of it, I agree. I'm so sick of this. We were a-holes for not having it on bloomilk, now the same people are crabby because it is here. Can't win for losing. Incorrect. The same people are not being crabby about it being here. Different people are complaining this time. Lumping in everyone together is silly. While the topic heading may be not be worded the best way, it is not necessarily a poke at the set itself. That may be the perception of an individual who does not read the OP's first post very carefully though. Well I guess that is great news because judging by the number of new posters the game is growing by leaps and bounds. The job of zero marketing that Wizards did finally struck gold!!! It is a shame it did not strike gold until after they cancelled it. I tend to agree with Bill on this. quite frankly I find it hard to believe that people are having trouble using the squad builder because of DOTF.... I mean really it is not like at this point Clone Strike is not a turd of a set. It is not keeping people from using the functions of this site. If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, flies like a duck, swims like a duck...... it might be MDB!!! LOL Folks dont want V-sets on here fine..... I can fix that.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 1/30/2009
Posts: 6,457
Location: Southern Illinois
|
eMouse wrote:Getting off topic again.
Let's make it simple, the request is for a feature that would allow you to exclude a particular set or class of set from your list of available figures.
It's been suggested that the feature might be made more useful if it's available for all sets.
If you have any further suggestions on how to handle the feature, or how to improve the feature, let's hear it.
If you have any further input on why the feature is a good idea, or how it could be used, let's hear it.
If you have any further input on how to produce such a feature with the current system, let's hear it.
If you have any comments about the quality of a particular set, or the credibility of a particular poster, don't bother posting.
To throw in my two cents, I'd like to see this coupled with the addition of special scenario figures that WotC produced. So you could make use of those figures in leisure play or when putting together a reference sheet for those scenarios, while easily excluding them when building tournament armies. Ahem. This nicely summed up where this thread needs to be heading. +1 to eMouse's last suggestion.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 8/24/2008
Posts: 812
Location: Parkville, MD
|
I concur with eMouse's statement about staying on topic.
Nonetheless, I feel it important to address some issues dean brought up.
The first thing to note is that I have found new people joining the game, even though it has stopped being produced by wizards. In addition to those new people are those who had recently started playing the game towards the end of Wizards. Both groups of these did not imediately start utilizing BlooMilk for its forums or squad building, but have decided to do so later. That is not to say there is no problem with multi-accounting on here, as there are many users who have multiple accounts. But this may help explain new users registering and people's unfamilarity with all of the sets and other aspects of the game.
In regards to the original topic, I find that the individual's request was his opinion and it was a fairly reasonable one. I thought that changing it for just one set is not worth the effort; however, if there was an added option for all sets used, it would make things more interesting for squad building. Just because someone is of differing opinion than you or are not particularily a fan of the v-sets, does not mean they are scheming against anyone.
As to dean's final statement I would like to make it clear that most of the BlooMilk community is a great fan of the V-set. And just because there are a few individuals who don't like it, does not mean that most people don't want that. People should be entitled to express their opinions. Even if their opinions happen to be that they do not like the V-sets because they are not officially licensed.
I want to end the discussion outside of the original topic there. As eMouse clearly stated, the purpose of the original topic keeps getting derailed and it needs to get back on track. If anyone feels the need to continue talking about things other than the topic, please do so outside of this thread. People can always BM/PM me. Thanks.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/20/2010
Posts: 109
|
billiv15 wrote:I guess that depends on your reading of new posters. I tend to fall with history, that odds are, a brand new poster commenting on this topic, isn't a new poster. You are assuming otherwise. Neither view can be proven as of yet, but to state with certainty, "different people" does not take into account history of discussion on this topic. Given history, I am much more likely to be correct than you :) This seems to be aimed in my direction, so allow me to retort. Cmears is a friend of mine from work whom I just got into minis about six weeks ago. He has bought several cases since then, and we often play booster back sessions. I introduced him to bloomilk after it looked like he was serious about collecting, so that he could utilize the squad building, and organize his minis. We've discussed DOTF at length as he learned more about the game, and asked me what DOTF was. I explained and he said that he wasn’t interested in them. I said I agreed. So when I commented in this thread, I told him about it, and he chose to make his posting debut in my defense. I was on bloomilk for months before I actually signed up, and a while before I started participating in the forums, which I sometimes regret ever doing. I have another friend with whom I've played Star Wars minis since its beginning, but we only play Rebel Storm because he feels that everything else started down the road of making overpowered hero character and took it away from the tactical minis game it was. He would never sign up here, but yet he's still a long time minis player. So, just because people aren't as fanatic about minis as some of you, doesn't mean we don't enjoy the game in our own ways, and it surely doesn't mean there can't be a new player, just because the game is out of production. I didn't start seriously collecting minis until it was announced that it was going out of production, because i didn't want it to fade into history without me having gotten the figs I wanted.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Bloo Milk Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 4/4/2008
Posts: 1,441
|
Rikalonius wrote:billiv15 wrote:I guess that depends on your reading of new posters. I tend to fall with history, that odds are, a brand new poster commenting on this topic, isn't a new poster. You are assuming otherwise. Neither view can be proven as of yet, but to state with certainty, "different people" does not take into account history of discussion on this topic. Given history, I am much more likely to be correct than you :) This seems to be aimed in my direction, so allow me to retort. Cmears is a friend of mine from work whom I just got into minis about six weeks ago. He has bought several cases since then, and we often play booster back sessions. I introduced him to bloomilk after it looked like he was serious about collecting, so that he could utilize the squad building, and organize his minis. We've discussed DOTF at length as he learned more about the game, and asked me what DOTF was. I explained and he said that he wasn’t interested in them. I said I agreed. So when I commented in this thread, I told him about it, and he chose to make his posting debut in my defense. I was on bloomilk for months before I actually signed up, and a while before I started participating in the forums, which I sometimes regret ever doing. I have another friend with whom I've played Star Wars minis since its beginning, but we only play Rebel Storm because he feels that everything else started down the road of making overpowered hero character and took it away from the tactical minis game it was. He would never sign up here, but yet he's still a long time minis player. So, just because people aren't as fanatic about minis as some of you, doesn't mean we don't enjoy the game in our own ways, and it surely doesn't mean there can't be a new player, just because the game is out of production. I didn't start seriously collecting minis until it was announced that it was going out of production, because i didn't want it to fade into history without me having gotten the figs I wanted. Nope, wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, just pointing out a common trend. You may well be caught in the middle of someone else' bad behavior, and for that I apologize. It's a crying wolf thing. The first time it happens, coincidence, the second time, fishy, the third, fourth, fifth, 12th? You start seeing a trend. If it isn't you, just ignore it and move on. Just beware of what history you are stepping into when you make statements, because that's part of joining a community too.
|
|
Rank: Moderator
Groups: Member
, Moderator
Joined: 3/17/2009
Posts: 256
|
Clearly too many toes have been stepped on already in this thread for it to get back on subject. I'm locking it and will split it off into two new threads that focus solely on the feature requests brought up in this thread.
Do not attempt to bring up unrelated 'issues' in the new threads.
|
|
|
Guest |