Congrats and comments

[fallen851]

I was nothing but patient with you in regards to missile damage, and if I remember correctly at least half of the people involed in the debate agreed with me rather than you. Once again, just because I won't accept your viewpoint you're resorting to personal attacks. Please refrain from doing that.

You obviously didn't care for my posts, and by referring to them as you just did, that is a personal attack on me, disregarding my comments with the same "What is in my interests in good for EB" rhetoric. I made no personal attacks on you, just questioned your actions of not directly responding to points Macroi raised. You still have not done that or offered any explanation.

Just because "half of the people agree" or whatever, doesn't mean you or I are right or wrong. We all should be reasonable* people and come together and reach a compromise. Macroi reached out, and you responded (not attacking you personally, but your actions) by shutting down any kind of compromise with defense mechanisms (ie "you know we tested it, it's fine"). Then your EB friends come and give us more defense mechanisms ("QM is really busy you know"). In that thread, as well as this one, instead of trying to reach a compromise (since we all want the same thing...), you followed the George W. Bush scheme, whip up as much support you can without giving an inch, and then say "what I did was justified" based on this support. That is not a model for compromise or support, your comments in both threads have had polarizing effects.

The problem is not how many people support who, the problem is whether or not people are willing to be reasonable* and compromise and accept others ideas. If we choose to define it in those terms, we see that you have not supported why you do what you have in the EDU by fact, making you unreasonable. Now perhaps you can support what you do with fact (ie to make this clear a fact is "I did this because of this", while an opinion is "This is fine because of this", in other words report what you did objectively, then defend it subjectively, don't just tell us the subjective part), but you won't tell us.

*Reasonable as defined by something being supported or justified by fact.

Macroi, I'll be posting up my system for balancing in the modding forum in a bit. I don't know why anyone thinks editing the EDU text is a monumental task, I edited the one for my mod and balanced it in the matter of days... despite radical changes, it is far more balanced than what I've seen of EB (particularly elephants and generals). I think this can be attributed to the fact I just don't stop working until it is done, and the fact I playtest over and over again.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

This mod is for fun. It's a volunteer thing. We do it for fun and our individual level of interest. That and a lot of hard work make Q a great guy to work in EB. He's a joy to work with and he is reasonable with people who show him respect (which is everyone in EB) and he gets a lot done.

Anyone is free to make further changes to EB as they like and make that available to the public also, but taking a hostile attitude at this point (and it is hostile) is not going to help anything. I don't see why any EB member would feel the need to have to come back and answer the imperatives and demands that are being made here. Actually, if people inside EB were this combative and hostile, no one would pay any attention to them.