Backfire wrote: Are you suggesting I don't play ATG? I do play. You can come and join my league right now
"Just a word to the wise--this squeaky wheel approach is how we got BPv3 and RP repricing." Please elaborate on this. Are you suggesting I stop making threads or stick to emails?
On the first item, no it was no one on this thread. Just an occasional forager that many here probably know. I am almost on my second hiatus in almost 20 years here, so I will respectfully decline as I play a couple more credits--nothing against you.
On the second, there is much about this issue in other exasperatingly long threads that are not worth revisiting in greater detail. Suffice to say..."Super Relievers are a problem! They are Unfair!" Then we get BPv3 and new pricing that "fixed" one game feature and created another.
Any perceived inequities--whether it is so-called transparency, or rulesets, or whatever--apply to everyone equally.
I guess what gets tiring is the community is superb in trying to help each other. Yet in some cases that is never enough and there is a desire for a reading from a "secret" rulebook that always works...which of course is an oxymoron.
The Wiki is almost 100% accurate. Not quite, but close enough. It could be improved.
But the game mechanics are literally the game--lookup tables, cards, etc. Still, sometimes the complaints are from folks who cannot even read a card or understand the difference between a gbA and gbB even though it is all publicly available data. That is ok before understanding the game mechanics, and getting honest answers to questions. But when asking the same question repeatedly and ignoring the responses because they are not what was desired? That is different.
And we all ask questions. There are exceedingly successful managers here for decades who ask questions. I am not one of those, but If I ask why a result occurred, and someone has a plausible explanation that I cannot refute, I accept it and say thank you. I don't then refuse the answer, alter the question, and start down another path where there may not be answers. It is a bait and switch.
So sometimes it seems like it isn't about answering a question. Because the community answers in spades but if it is a questioner who doesn't like the answers they get so they ignore it, then it isn't really about answering a question in good faith. In some cases it is about pitching a rhetorical question for the purpose of advocating a position.
And we go round and round when there are people trying to honestly assist a person who doesn't want to be assisted. They ignore the response and argue the next canard. And don't ask if that is directed at you or anyone else. I can't know motivations. This is truly generic.