Yeah, resurrection is a tactical intervention performed often by Captains, Conquerors or Healers. It represent rallies into a fight and returns players to the battle. There are no issues around the concept. The only issues is when its referenced to be fast travel. As it stands right now, resurrection doesn't clear death penalties either so its a poor substitute for not dying in the first place.
It was you who created a thread asking for Scrolls of Resurrection, weren't you? Why are you arguing with me about teleport?
Rez scroll pops you up directly where you were lying dead. It has nothing to do with teleportation.
Basic resurrection action will pop you up in some different place, yes, but at that point you would've "paid" for that "teleport" with your loot. Your suggestion allows a whole party of people make a controlled teleport at the price of a single controlled death. People will minimize their losses by trading any droppables away on the lamb and suiciding after that.
When the whole party has to die (as would be the case with a successful ambush by an enemy) - you wouldn't have anyone to trade your loot to, so you'd "pay" for the "teleport". And that's not even considering the scale of the difference between a single death penalty and 8 penalties.
But on the topic of teleportation through resurrection, I've brought it up years ago at this point, in the context of corruption balancing values. If it was up to me, I'd minimize the "teleport" distance as much as possible, to not only prevent the very abuse we're discussing, but to also allow for quicker retaliation against a PKer or an attacking enemy party. But nowhere in that discussion did I suggest teleporting the entire party w/o them dying. Because, as I've said already, I've played with such a mechanic and consider it utter trash.
Fast travel is travelling large distances in some manner considered to be fast. Like a Blimp, Dragon, Griffon, Hearth Stone, Teleport etc.
Edit: Also, if you don't have the relocation on the resurrection skill then you would be unable to get people out of fires, lava, water, aggro ranges etc.
That's exactly what resurrection is doing. If nobody resurrects you the game will move your character back to your node. Resurrection bypasses that game action and summons your character next to the caster.
This guy is making a argument while completely ignore all design elements on why you wouldn't want to die. And this is the guy that says devs wont change anything in a game they are working on. This person has to be on the good stuff.
No, I don't think you go back to the node all the time. There are respawn pads in the open world.
Honestly i think you should go back to node, it is a pretty big punishment to have to start there again in a game that is pvx where pvp can happen to get loot.
The guy you are arguing with based on his past log i feel doesn't do pvp. So he doesn't understand the downsides to death even if he is ignoring the mature xp debt. But he ignores the debt since he is use to other games where leveling takes no time, compared to hundreds of hours..
I don't see going back to node as a big punishment though...also corrupted players need the res pads outside nodes.
I think the punishment is worse if your relocated to a nearby res pad and might have to fight further to get your loot back to base.
If your group is trying to kill a boss or farm a dungeon and you go only to be wiped by players and have to walk back multiple times. You will be more inclined to give up and go to another spot. That time investment is big and adds up.
Yeah I do understand your point but what about when you are on the opposite continent and you die in contestation? Bit of a bad issue to be teleported back to your node then in my opinion.
Honestly i think you should go back to node, it is a pretty big punishment to have to start there again in a game that is pvx where pvp can happen to get loot.
The guy you are arguing with based on his past log i feel doesn't do pvp. So he doesn't understand the downsides to death even if he is ignoring the mature xp debt. But he ignores the debt since he is use to other games where leveling takes no time, compared to hundreds of hours..
Even outside the potential teleportation abuse, I think this would lead to smaller amount of pvp, while also removing people from the game because running back would be considered a chore.
I think there could be stages of respawn points. If you die in pvp once - you get the closest possible point. If you die in pve - you get "entrance" of your current location. If you die from a PKer - you get closest and entrance. If you die from a player (purple or red), say, 3 times within a short period of time (10 min?) - you get those two options and the option to respawn at the nearest node center.
This way you could come back for a revenge pretty fast (be it a pvp or a PKer one), while also getting a chance to run away from an annoying pursuer a bit easier. Pve death bringing you to the entrance would be justified by "you weren't good enough for that spot" reasoning and would allow you to reposition to an easier location. And the node respawn would come with a price of several deaths, so people wouldn't think of abusing it all that much.
I'm against totems really. Not the idea per say, depends what the fountains look like and whether the devs agree. I don't think fountains are a cleric remit though...more of a summoner remit.
Nik isn't the only dude who wants Resurrection scrolls. It has been explained both RS' and Group Teleport were in l2 and we want the better stuff from l2, not the worst.
My point is that it already is in the game and everyone has access to it through items, requested by NiKr the person who is talking to me about TP abuse and going on about how it will exist only if a Scientific Metropolis has been developed.
I know that Steven has said that fast travel will be possible only through Scientific Metropolis. But that doesn't change the fact that Resurrection is a fast-travel type of utility in the open world.
We have no real idea of how the respawn points will work, where they'll be located or how they'll be balanced. This was exactly why my previous discussion on this topic didn't get far. I didn't want to speculate or theorize about smth that we have no damn clue about. But you obviously don't have that issue, as has been evident from your arguments in these past few threads.
Yes, effectively a respawn can be considered a teleport and a rez can be considered a reverse teleport, but their abusability would only matter if we did in fact only respawned in node centers. But if the game has a better respawn point design - resurrection would not be an abusable mechanic.
Though again, it would not be abusable as long as every person pays for it with death penalties. Your suggestion for a full party teleport still ruins pvp, lets the party move to a set location (that is not game's default) - all at the price of a single controlled purple death penalty. That is abusable imo.
Well, we go through these loops each month. The problem is text can be misconstrued and emotions can run high. We offer input and advice in good faith. Just as your ideas are stated, our ideas are stated. Sometimes, improvements are made and sometimes improvements aren't. However, if you are not aware of the death penalties I advise you check the wiki.
Yeah, I know he is not the only one. And most definitely these items were going to be implemented. But it's hypocritical to bash my idea for improved Cleric gameplay on the basis of TP being only for Scientific Metropolis when he requested a point-to-click item which functions as a teleport.
If your idea was just "cleric can setup a respawn point within a certain distance and the party members can choose that point when they respawn" - I'd have almost no issues with that. Hell, I'd probably even like it, because that would make pvp way better. But that wasn't your suggestion. And when I brought up issues with your suggestion, you didn't try to argue against those issues or change your suggestion. You just started arguing semantics of the word "teleportation".
People will die all the time. Hopefully the PvE will be hard and the PvP will be sick. Steven and the devs have removed death penalties from a lot of pvp events which has been a boon. The question isn't whether people will die, the question is how will the people die? Most will turn purple but some will remain green. I'm not sure whether a moveable respawn point would be too overpowered or not.
You may not have a real idea of how respawning will work but that's not for everyone. One doesn't need a PhD in game development to understand what respawning is and how it is implemented in a game.
L2 let you respawn at the nearest town or your fort or your clan hall or your castle. WoW had you run a ghost to your corpse or get a debuff if you wanted to "teleport". And I'm sure there's a ton of other mmos that have their own designs of respawn mechanics and locations. And so far, the only respawn mechanic that we know for sure is that PKers will respawn at random locations. Though even there we've got no clue if it'll be within some area or literally anywhere on the map.
You like to argue against your own made up "facts", when there's been no concrete info to support neither the argument nor the "fact".
I stopped arguing with you after you talked about how this not working for pugs. I was talking with Neurath.
Yes, you were happy that I disagreed with your idea, w/o defending the idea itself or explaining how my concerns were invalid. That is a great stance to have when you're trying to make a suggestion for a game.
I'm just wondering how close Enchanter will be to DnD. I'm not sure if an Enchanter can replace a bard. Though, the summoner blurbs suggest an Enchanter can. I will test Oracle, Magician and Enchanter in A2. If I get more time I'll test other classes too. I'm quite stoked for the game still. Especially seeing the extra polish of Mage.
Honestly i think you should go back to node, it is a pretty big punishment to have to start there again in a game that is pvx where pvp can happen to get loot.
The guy you are arguing with based on his past log i feel doesn't do pvp. So he doesn't understand the downsides to death even if he is ignoring the mature xp debt. But he ignores the debt since he is use to other games where leveling takes no time, compared to hundreds of hours..
Even outside the potential teleportation abuse, I think this would lead to smaller amount of pvp, while also removing people from the game because running back would be considered a chore.
I think there could be stages of respawn points. If you die in pvp once - you get the closest possible point. If you die in pve - you get "entrance" of your current location. If you die from a PKer - you get closest and entrance. If you die from a player (purple or red), say, 3 times within a short period of time (10 min?) - you get those two options and the option to respawn at the nearest node center.
This way you could come back for a revenge pretty fast (be it a pvp or a PKer one), while also getting a chance to run away from an annoying pursuer a bit easier. Pve death bringing you to the entrance would be justified by "you weren't good enough for that spot" reasoning and would allow you to reposition to an easier location. And the node respawn would come with a price of several deaths, so people wouldn't think of abusing it all that much.
This I can agree with if you keep dying constantly giving a buffer, before you have to spawn back at town. I tend to think more hardcore stuff but this would be more casual for those types of players akin to lives before you know your at your limit. And maybe at some more suspense in giving you a choice in what you want to do at your last life before you need to walk again.
Some players do not want to pvp. On top of that, there is no risk in contestation without corruption. Steven might remove corruption around world bosses but it remains to be seen.
There is a balance in a pvx game. We don't want pvp to overshadow pve or pve to overshadow pvp. There must be scope snd reason to do both and have all types of players.
It is a fair trade to become corrupted and wipe a whole group on a boss. PvE players do fight back but when they choose to and do not tend to enjoy auto flagging. Making everyone purple means there will be no diplomacy, only group wipes.
The game works with GCDs and oGCDs. You have 2 damage GCDs which you press on cooldown throughout a fight.
You have healing oGCDs whose usage you try to optimize in order to increase your damage output by not resorting to healing GCDs.
The fight is 19 mins long. I have used 276 GCDs for my nuke and 29 for my DoT. These are my only two damaging GCDs.
In comparison, the total amount of healing GCDs used was 33.
Okay, sounds like you played a game with predetermined decisionmaking (because if there's a whole slew of skills that you can only choose one of every 2.5 seconds, chances are it will already be decided for you which skill is optimal when that GCD comes off, rendering all the other options useless for a while.)
And more importantly, if I'm reading your concerns about the raids/pve content correctly, it seems that the game isn't great at challenging your party as a whole, leaving you as the healer with only DPS to focus your conscious decisionmaking on.
It seems to me that you are deeply in need of picking up a PvP/RvR-centric game, or at least a game where raids lead to truly unpredictable, difficult-to-manage situations, so you can really feel what a healer's role is supposed to be like when things get stressful.
The fun in the healer's gameplay for me has never benefitted from being given little dps minigames to engage in during the fights that the party has control over. The fun always comes from using proper preparation on being ready for the moment when the party inevitably loses control over the situation, at which point I have to have my regular buff upkeep already managed, so that I can primarily focus on deciding what to prioritise in order to help my party members manage the problems we under and help them regain control more quickly, or stay floating until the fight is over.
Interestingly, without ever having played the game, I just looked up opinions about the FF14 healer on YouTube, and immediately found someone who pretty much exactly mirrored my opinion in the context of the game, except talking about the game as if it already plays like that.
Whether he's right that the type of content he gets to play in FF14 sufficiently offers that type of challenge is a detail that isn't worth discussing here. The point is: that's the kind of challenge a healer player can generally expect from good game design, and it has little do to do with the class balance itself.
Cleric as a base archetype is going to be irrelevant in PvE. And because its unique utility is inconsequential, the developers will make it overpowered so that people opt in to play it.
Yeah, you completely disregard the role that healers have when damage becomes an issue. And if your premise is that dungeons won't be a challenge for groups and the whole point will be speedrunning, your vague criticisms so far aren't even a start to a solution anyway. You're the game design equivalent of a doctor expecting an amputation, and equipping us with a bandaid. Then this isn't a discussion of class balance, it's a rant about the consequences of bad dungeon design, taking up space in a class balance discussion, and desperatey digging for class balance solutions.
As a sidenote, I don't think this is how most games treat the term "global cooldown". In my experience, in most games GCD is essentially an animation cooldown (sometimes extended to 0.25 - 1s) that serves to stall the game pacing a little. On top of that, abilities have their own regular 5-240 second cooldown.
So I think if we're going to bring up this term again at all, I think we have to describe the effect we're talking about more specifically.
The way I see it, for the effect you are talking about "shared cooldown" would be a much more useful term, because it's each ability's only cooldown, not an additional global effect next to the individual cooldown.
The only one who can validate you for all the posts you didn't write is you.
I have played RvR games, thank you for your recommendations but I am fairly certain that you are exaggerating
I'd imagine it's definitely more unpredictable than the scripted fights of ff14. And if ones finds unpredictable stuff thrilling - they'll find it, well, thrilling.
FFXIV is about doing mechanics correctly. Mistakes wipe. They deal unhealable damage.
I have played RvR games, thank you for your recommendations but I am fairly certain that you are exaggerating about the thrill and unpredictability of your experience.
GCD stands for global cooldown. The amount of time you need before using another ability. How other games treat that term is irrelevant when we are discussing FFXIV.
I'm so not going to enjoy the months of Alpha-2 testing where I have to continually repeat to others the differences between FF14 and FF11, especially since I don't play the former for exactly the reason you described.
My head hurts just thinking about it.
Anyways just throwing in the usual contrast...
FFXI is about prioritizing your responses to multiple simultaneous changing conditions that limit the group's effectiveness. Some are also standard unavoidable damage mainly to add another condition, but actually, choosing not to heal because doing something else matters more is often the 'healer skill check'.
I have played RvR games, thank you for your recommendations but I am fairly certain that you are exaggerating about the thrill and unpredictability of your experience.
If you're talking about ESO or GW2, you didn't play RvR games, you played theme parks with one RvR ride. I'm talking about DAOCamelot, Regnum, or games with PvP that matches those RvR experiences. (Maybe ArcheAge, maybe lots of older MMOs with good PvP and overland guild combat. Even Lotro might be decent, though I doubt it. I won't claim to have played the majority of them, but I've played and seen enough to know that they can be good.)
You don't have to agree with that point or play games I liked, it was a suggestion to open your perspective and offer you a more intriguing, positive MMO experience. What would be much more useful is a response to my points about healer gameplay and the appealing elements of it, which is the type of thing you should be ready/prepared to do, if your criticism of AoC's cleric is justified.
GCD stands for global cooldown. The amount of time you need before using another ability. How other games treat that term is irrelevant when we are discussing FFXIV.
But we're discussing Ashes of Creation. You seem to enjoy switching back and forth between discussions of general game design principles and specific games' mechanics because it lets you criticise everything without defending anything you say, but that won't inform or influence anyone trying to draw a conclusion from the bigger picture of the dicussion. Being clear about what type of effect you're talking about, and which properties of it make you judge it the way you do, would help make your points more pertinent.
The only one who can validate you for all the posts you didn't write is you.
If they can't win against another group dominating a dungeon, then they as PvE-ers should become citizens of the node that the group is from
What makes you think being in the same node as someone will help?
I mean, my guild will consist of citizens of a number of nodes, if we are killing a boss and a group or raid comes along and attempts to deprive us of our loot, they become our rivals regardless of what node they are from.
But we're discussing Ashes of Creation. You seem to enjoy switching back and forth between discussions of general game design principles and specific games' mechanics because it lets you criticise everything without defending anything you say, but that won't inform or influence anyone trying to draw a conclusion from the bigger picture of the dicussion. Being clear about what type of effect you're talking about, and which properties of it make you judge it the way you do, would help make your points more pertinent.
No, that comment was not discussing Ashes of Creation. I was precisely asked what games have the best healer gameplay and I answered that question by using FFXIV as an example to point what I don't like.
There is something seriously wrong with your thought process and I am getting tired of it.
Wait, so, someone asks you what games you think had good healer mechanics, you reply with a game that has healer mechanics you don't like, and then you suggest someone else's thought process is seriously wrong?
No, that comment was not discussing Ashes of Creation.
I didn't say it was. I just said that on the broader scale, on this forum, we're discussing Ashes of Creation (and MMO theory/design.) I didn't say you weren't allowed or were wrong for writing the way you had. I just justified why my general statement about the term "GCD" was still relevant.
Which is why I then continued to talk about how you jump back-and-forth from large-scale concepts to specific examples as it's convenient for your self-representation, but never connecting and drawing back conclusions in either direction. If it's unclear to you why I said "We're discussing Ashes," you set us up for this problem by talking about FF14's GCD without connecting it to the general question of intriguing healer/class design.
What would be much more useful is a response to my points about healer gameplay and the appealing elements of it, which is the type of thing you should be ready/prepared to do, if your criticism of AoC's cleric is justified.
It's so sad, I really wonder how much more insightful your opinions and ideas could be if you'd just have the confidence to continue a discussion instead of just dodging any point that might reveal an inconsistency in your thoughts.
I responded to you because I think there's a possibility that your ideas about game pacing/class design might be more funcitonal for a modern game than mine. (Obviously I'm doubtful of it, as I am sure you are the other way - there's a reason they are my opinions. But I acknowledge the possibility.)
I know you're not here to convince me, but you should still be interested in showing that your suggestions/ideas can convince someone, no?
Comments
Basic resurrection action will pop you up in some different place, yes, but at that point you would've "paid" for that "teleport" with your loot. Your suggestion allows a whole party of people make a controlled teleport at the price of a single controlled death. People will minimize their losses by trading any droppables away on the lamb and suiciding after that.
When the whole party has to die (as would be the case with a successful ambush by an enemy) - you wouldn't have anyone to trade your loot to, so you'd "pay" for the "teleport". And that's not even considering the scale of the difference between a single death penalty and 8 penalties.
But on the topic of teleportation through resurrection, I've brought it up years ago at this point, in the context of corruption balancing values. If it was up to me, I'd minimize the "teleport" distance as much as possible, to not only prevent the very abuse we're discussing, but to also allow for quicker retaliation against a PKer or an attacking enemy party. But nowhere in that discussion did I suggest teleporting the entire party w/o them dying. Because, as I've said already, I've played with such a mechanic and consider it utter trash.
Edit: Also, if you don't have the relocation on the resurrection skill then you would be unable to get people out of fires, lava, water, aggro ranges etc.
This guy is making a argument while completely ignore all design elements on why you wouldn't want to die. And this is the guy that says devs wont change anything in a game they are working on. This person has to be on the good stuff.
Honestly i think you should go back to node, it is a pretty big punishment to have to start there again in a game that is pvx where pvp can happen to get loot.
The guy you are arguing with based on his past log i feel doesn't do pvp. So he doesn't understand the downsides to death even if he is ignoring the mature xp debt. But he ignores the debt since he is use to other games where leveling takes no time, compared to hundreds of hours..
I think the punishment is worse if your relocated to a nearby res pad and might have to fight further to get your loot back to base.
If your group is trying to kill a boss or farm a dungeon and you go only to be wiped by players and have to walk back multiple times. You will be more inclined to give up and go to another spot. That time investment is big and adds up.
I think there could be stages of respawn points. If you die in pvp once - you get the closest possible point. If you die in pve - you get "entrance" of your current location. If you die from a PKer - you get closest and entrance. If you die from a player (purple or red), say, 3 times within a short period of time (10 min?) - you get those two options and the option to respawn at the nearest node center.
This way you could come back for a revenge pretty fast (be it a pvp or a PKer one), while also getting a chance to run away from an annoying pursuer a bit easier. Pve death bringing you to the entrance would be justified by "you weren't good enough for that spot" reasoning and would allow you to reposition to an easier location. And the node respawn would come with a price of several deaths, so people wouldn't think of abusing it all that much.
Yes, effectively a respawn can be considered a teleport and a rez can be considered a reverse teleport, but their abusability would only matter if we did in fact only respawned in node centers. But if the game has a better respawn point design - resurrection would not be an abusable mechanic.
Though again, it would not be abusable as long as every person pays for it with death penalties. Your suggestion for a full party teleport still ruins pvp, lets the party move to a set location (that is not game's default) - all at the price of a single controlled purple death penalty. That is abusable imo.
You like to argue against your own made up "facts", when there's been no concrete info to support neither the argument nor the "fact".
This I can agree with if you keep dying constantly giving a buffer, before you have to spawn back at town. I tend to think more hardcore stuff but this would be more casual for those types of players akin to lives before you know your at your limit. And maybe at some more suspense in giving you a choice in what you want to do at your last life before you need to walk again.
There is a balance in a pvx game. We don't want pvp to overshadow pve or pve to overshadow pvp. There must be scope snd reason to do both and have all types of players.
Okay, sounds like you played a game with predetermined decisionmaking (because if there's a whole slew of skills that you can only choose one of every 2.5 seconds, chances are it will already be decided for you which skill is optimal when that GCD comes off, rendering all the other options useless for a while.)
And more importantly, if I'm reading your concerns about the raids/pve content correctly, it seems that the game isn't great at challenging your party as a whole, leaving you as the healer with only DPS to focus your conscious decisionmaking on.
It seems to me that you are deeply in need of picking up a PvP/RvR-centric game, or at least a game where raids lead to truly unpredictable, difficult-to-manage situations, so you can really feel what a healer's role is supposed to be like when things get stressful.
The fun in the healer's gameplay for me has never benefitted from being given little dps minigames to engage in during the fights that the party has control over. The fun always comes from using proper preparation on being ready for the moment when the party inevitably loses control over the situation, at which point I have to have my regular buff upkeep already managed, so that I can primarily focus on deciding what to prioritise in order to help my party members manage the problems we under and help them regain control more quickly, or stay floating until the fight is over.
Interestingly, without ever having played the game, I just looked up opinions about the FF14 healer on YouTube, and immediately found someone who pretty much exactly mirrored my opinion in the context of the game, except talking about the game as if it already plays like that.
Whether he's right that the type of content he gets to play in FF14 sufficiently offers that type of challenge is a detail that isn't worth discussing here. The point is: that's the kind of challenge a healer player can generally expect from good game design, and it has little do to do with the class balance itself.
Yeah, you completely disregard the role that healers have when damage becomes an issue. And if your premise is that dungeons won't be a challenge for groups and the whole point will be speedrunning, your vague criticisms so far aren't even a start to a solution anyway. You're the game design equivalent of a doctor expecting an amputation, and equipping us with a bandaid. Then this isn't a discussion of class balance, it's a rant about the consequences of bad dungeon design, taking up space in a class balance discussion, and desperatey digging for class balance solutions.
As a sidenote, I don't think this is how most games treat the term "global cooldown". In my experience, in most games GCD is essentially an animation cooldown (sometimes extended to 0.25 - 1s) that serves to stall the game pacing a little. On top of that, abilities have their own regular 5-240 second cooldown.
So I think if we're going to bring up this term again at all, I think we have to describe the effect we're talking about more specifically.
The way I see it, for the effect you are talking about "shared cooldown" would be a much more useful term, because it's each ability's only cooldown, not an additional global effect next to the individual cooldown.
I'm so not going to enjoy the months of Alpha-2 testing where I have to continually repeat to others the differences between FF14 and FF11, especially since I don't play the former for exactly the reason you described.
My head hurts just thinking about it.
Anyways just throwing in the usual contrast...
FFXI is about prioritizing your responses to multiple simultaneous changing conditions that limit the group's effectiveness. Some are also standard unavoidable damage mainly to add another condition, but actually, choosing not to heal because doing something else matters more is often the 'healer skill check'.
You don't have to agree with that point or play games I liked, it was a suggestion to open your perspective and offer you a more intriguing, positive MMO experience. What would be much more useful is a response to my points about healer gameplay and the appealing elements of it, which is the type of thing you should be ready/prepared to do, if your criticism of AoC's cleric is justified.
But we're discussing Ashes of Creation. You seem to enjoy switching back and forth between discussions of general game design principles and specific games' mechanics because it lets you criticise everything without defending anything you say, but that won't inform or influence anyone trying to draw a conclusion from the bigger picture of the dicussion. Being clear about what type of effect you're talking about, and which properties of it make you judge it the way you do, would help make your points more pertinent.
I mean, my guild will consist of citizens of a number of nodes, if we are killing a boss and a group or raid comes along and attempts to deprive us of our loot, they become our rivals regardless of what node they are from.
Wait, so, someone asks you what games you think had good healer mechanics, you reply with a game that has healer mechanics you don't like, and then you suggest someone else's thought process is seriously wrong?
Which is why I then continued to talk about how you jump back-and-forth from large-scale concepts to specific examples as it's convenient for your self-representation, but never connecting and drawing back conclusions in either direction. If it's unclear to you why I said "We're discussing Ashes," you set us up for this problem by talking about FF14's GCD without connecting it to the general question of intriguing healer/class design.
I know. I responded to those examples. Remember? The parts of my comment you ignored?
It's so sad, I really wonder how much more insightful your opinions and ideas could be if you'd just have the confidence to continue a discussion instead of just dodging any point that might reveal an inconsistency in your thoughts.
I responded to you because I think there's a possibility that your ideas about game pacing/class design might be more funcitonal for a modern game than mine. (Obviously I'm doubtful of it, as I am sure you are the other way - there's a reason they are my opinions. But I acknowledge the possibility.)
I know you're not here to convince me, but you should still be interested in showing that your suggestions/ideas can convince someone, no?
@Noaani ☠💀☠