Jeffrey Morris: Dan Magaha said to ask you these two questions

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Libertarian
I was told by a Firaxis employee to ask Jeff. I asked Jeff. He said that he would answer whenever he felt like it. I said that I would extend him the same treatment in recommending the game to my friends.

*buzzer sound*

Bzzzttt... WRONG!!

Here is what Jeff actually said:

We are aware of these feature requests, and when we have something concrete to say about them, we will.

Jeff

Now where in that did he say "that he would answer whenever he felt like it"?? Hint, he DIDN'T. He said when they have something CONCRETE to say, i.e. Yes we are going to put them in the next patch or NO we can't find a way to do it, then he would SAY SO.

What part of that did you not comprehend when you read it the first time? Oh, wait, since you had been personally bashing the people at Firaxis you automatically assumed they would do the same to you when they responded so jumped to a conclusion.

If I had treated my customers that way, I wouldn't still have a business. [...shrug...] Maybe it's a Southern thing. We don't think courtesy is a waste of time. What Jeff did exactly was to waste time. His. Mine. And yours. His rude brush-off was uncalled for.

As Steve Clark asked you before (and you conviently ignored, at least this far in the thread)m do you send that flowery crap to every one of the customers who ever ask you a question or make a suggestion for your software? If so, do you have more than 5-10 people who use your software? If so, what do you do when 10 people send questions or suggestions? What do you do when 50 people send suggestions/comments? 100? 1000?

And you never use form letters to respond either I bet, huh?

It went from "it's not my job" to "bug off". Yin is right. They don't know PR from BS.

Well Dan IS the web designer, not the programmer, he wouldn't know. You say you work as a programmer. If someone came up to you and asked indepth marketing or financial questions and you didn't know, would you LIE and tell them anything or would you tell them to ask someone else in the company, give them a name, and tell them that you don't know the answer to that question?

Hmm, for someone who has apparently worked as a professional for 20+ years you don't seem to have much knowledge about how companies and different people do their jobs.

[Libertarian]

Ozymandous (sic),

Your reasoning seems to go along these lines:

All cats die. Hitler is dead. Therefore, Hitler was a cat.

Pay attention, or have someone read this to you. Dan told me to ask Jeff. Get it so far? Dan's "answer" was "ask Jeff". Let me be sure you understand that what you are calling a response contained about as much useful information as a random quark fart. I've admitted that I was heavy-handed with Dan and Jeff, and have apologized for it. Your continuing to fuel a dead fire is an hillarious display of pathos.

Your whole arsenal of argument — faulty syllogisms, ad hominems, tu quoques — is tiresome conceptually, yet entertaining in a sort of primative way, something like one of those pathetic yet endearing sitcoms. Married with Children or something.

You're as all-over-the-place as an automated worker. Keep it up. Overall, I'm enjoying the spectacle.

[Akka]

Re: Re: Re: Yep, that says a lot about you.

Originally posted by Ozymandous
You know, when you complain about stupid logic you shouldn't use "stupid logic" to support your complaint.

lol, are all 2003 car's radically different than 2002 cars? Do they have better everything or just a few things? Are movie sequals radically different than the original or just better in a few areas (or worse). Just because something is named 2,3,4 or 100 doesn't mean that EVERYTHING will be improved.

Not to say it shouldn't all be improved but that doesn't mean it should ALL be improved either.

Ok, I was perhaps a little too complicated for your weak understanding. I'll try keep my explanations at a lower level since it seems you have big trouble to get it.

In your previous post, you said :
"Did Civ2 have stacked movement? Did you ever have a problem moving 20-30+ settlers around trying to terraform anything? No? Did you have the option to automate the settlers in Civ2 so they'd only clear forest or jungle or only build improvements where you didn't specifically put them? How about automatic pollution removal? Was that in Civ2?
To sum up : things were not in Civ2, so no need to complain that they were not in Civ3. Ok ? Still here ?

Then I used comparaison to make you understand that what was not a problem five or ten years ago in video games ARE actually a problem. Because video games evoluted. Aaaah, isn't it a little light of understanding that start to shines in your eyes ? Marvelous. I was afraid you were not able to grasp the concept of evolution.

Master of Magic, different engine and different company made it. Your point?

Hmm, so everything that's not in the game is from gross incompetence?

Now are you a clown or just completely brain dead ?
If SOMEONE could make stacked movement in 1992/1993, it means that it CAN be done, and that it's even easier now with the power of actual computer. NOT doing it when it's proved it can easily be done, and when it's such an improvement for gameplay, is INCOMPETENCE.
Hu, I'm going fairly high in the deduction level for your reduced abilities. I hope you did not get lost in the way.

Tell me, how many games have you designed and coded? Well? Where are they so we can play them and then point out every single thing you missed putting in that we think is "obvious".

Well? We're all waiting anxiously.

The farther I go the better it is
If I had any doubt about your stupidity here is the last proof I needed.
I imagine : you buy a car, ten miles later it breaks, you talk about this misfortune to a friend, cursing the ill-built car, and he tell you "you should shut up, 'cause you did not built a car that was better yourself".
Or did you ?

Funny boy, really

Now I don't flame often as I don't think it makes anything evolve, but as you did not even understood the extremely simple things I said in my previous post, I don't think you could be explained anything anyway.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Good lord.

You'd think I had asked for some sort of personalized customization, rather than asking for an answer to a question that had received unanimous support in five previous (and ignored) threads.

Sorry Spin Doctor, your tricks won't work.

You didn't ask for personal customization you asked for, nay demanded PERSONAL ATTENTION.

Your suggestion was by NO means the first of it's kind, it was however, one of the WORST instances of 'squeeky-wheel' syndrome I have witnessed in years on a webboard. And that is saying a lot.

I don't know what's worse: your apparent lack of understanding how childishly you have acted in DEMANDING answeres (assuming you really don't get that which I think you do), or your attempts to twist everything around so that you're always the victim.

It's enough to make someone sick and a prime example of what's wrong with this country.

Going back to your earlier post where you claim to be from the South. If you acted this way in the South where I grew up your parents must have moved from the north or else you were an extremely spoiled only child because my parents would have beat my ass if I had acted in the manner you have, DEMANDING answers and recognition.

Good Lord is right, only not in how you meant it!

If you people would prefer to play your late games without group movement and with bizarre unit activation, please feel free to speak up.

No one has said they don't like the ideas (at least the stacked movement thing), but others had posed the suggestions long before you did and they will continue to do so afterwards, only I HOPE that none of them act as immature and selfish as I have seen from you.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Golgo13
I have to agree with Lib on stacked movement. I'm not a programmer by trade, but I do know from playing CTP2 that stacked movement can be done.

Hmm, so Civ3 and CTP are built with the same "engine" eh? I mean if one game had this feature then any other game, remotely resembling that should have that feature, correct? I mean this is what your logic dictates, so I am just trying to clarify.

I also know that no stacked movement in Civ3 is a pain in the posterior and it should have been included in the original release not a patch.

Actually, I agree. I actually LIKE Lib's suggestions (surprise, surprise), I have never claimed otherwise. I DON'T like his tone or manner of posting themhowever, and hence my posts in response.

I have been on both sides, programming and PR and know the two don't often mix, at least not if you want good quality from the programmer.

Oz you really need to shut up.

Hmm, so I am not suppoed to post yet everyone else can just because you don't like what I say? Sorry, that "dog won't hunt." I'd advise you to use the "Ignore list" feature if you don't want to read what I say, it'll make life much easier for you because, I assure you, I am not leaving or ceasing to post.

I've read many of your posts on this thread and others.

And they say literacy is dead.

All you do is blast others for speaking their mind.

Correction. I "blast" others who post in an immature manner or who post claiming that the game sucks without example or proof. People should be able to back up what they say if they really mean it, because logic is more important than "feelings" IMHO. Asking people to support their claim or be a little nicer isn't "blasting". If they attack other posters or myself just because we don't agree with them then they should expect a response of like kind. After all if they can't stand the heat then get out of the kitchen.

I think it's obvious that many of the criticisms of Civ3 are logical and reasonable.

And I think many of them are not logical or reasonable. My opinion in response to your opinion, your problem with that?? (Oh I forgot, only people who agree with you should be able to post, forgot about that.. )

What do you have to offer to these forums besides hot air?

I offer a different view than you, that's all you need concern yourself of.

Now then thank you, drive through.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Libertarian
After a bit of introspection, I believe that I'm being too rough on the guys at Firaxis. In all probability, they're doing the best they can with the resources they have. I could provide a litany of reasons why I've snapped, but they're irrelevant.

Dan and Jeff, I apologize.

I'll try to play the game on a smaller map with fewer Civs. That might help ameliorate some of the tedium. Meanwhile, I do understand that you're people just like us, with feelings and the whole nine yards. I regret my mercilessness in my dealings with you.

I wish only that the cabalism weren't there, that we didn't have to fish and beg for information. I understand that some of what you do is proprietary, but some idea of what's in the works might go a long way to soothing those of us who don't like living in the fog of ignorance. Perhaps if it hadn't taken you so long to acknowledge...

Well, that's enough of that song. Onward.

Woo hoo, Congrats.

You were actually being civil, until the last paragraoh.. *sigh* You couldn't resist throwing blame a little, eh?

Oh well, just be happy that they ARE posting (meaning they read these boards), and ARE acknowledging us. Heck they even ask our opinions (see Jeff's thread asking about game balance).

All of us want to know what might be boosted or fixed, but as long as they ARE still working on issues I'm happy with that (most game companies don't even do that.)

Anywho...

[E_T]

Originally posted by Libertarian
quote shortened for basic points

I don't know whether I can address this to your satisfaction, but I'll try. Often, mutual comprehension depends so much on context and point of view. The worker question depends a great deal on your style of play.
.
.
.
Many of us prefer an empire building style of play, ....., the growth of your empire is one of those visual feedback elements that players consider rewarding.
.
.
.
All this makes workers one of the most valuable assets to the empire builder since only workers, unique among units, can achieve the primary objectives I've enumerated.

Dozens of workers are required for each city in the empire in order to nurture efficiently........ Once a city is conquered, the empire builder sends in a swarm of workers such that the conquered city's radius is fully developed within the turn.
.
.
.
With respect to captured workers, yes they are less efficient than native workers, HOWEVER... they are FREE!. They cost no maintenance whatsoever, and are therefore critical to the empire builder's commercial success as well.

So, I hope that with just a bit of empathy, you can see how important workers can be to empire builders. Unfortunately, it is the game design itself that makes using them so necessary. Therefore, given what we HAVE to do in order to build an empire, it would be a mercy of astounding magnitude to facilitate our necessary tactics with an interface that doesn't fight against us tooth and nail every step along the way.

When you must deal with your hundreds of workers one at a time AND doing so is made hideously difficult by a bizarre and senseless unit activation sequence, late game play is simply the worst drudgery imaginable. I'm not kidding when I say that the "just one more turn" quality of previous Civ incarnations morphs for us into an absolute dread that the next turn is coming.
.
.
.

HERE, HERE!!!



I do have a gameplay programing suggestion; group the units into their type, i.e. Worker/Settler, Defensive, Offensive, Naval & Air. Have an Player Option to have the game activate the type of units in an order by type.

Say I'm at Peace and I want to build up my holdings, then I set Workers to go first, followed by Naval, Defensive, Offensive and Air. If I'm Building up to war, them I might put my Naval first, then Offensive, Air, Defensive & Workers. If I'm At War, I might change it around again. If I click on a stack of Workers while the Offensive's are moving, then I should be able to work on them, then to back to the next regular movement in the Offensive's queue.

This should be implemented for the player only, don't do it for the A.I., it would make end of turn even worse. The Player sets the option Before going to the next turn, that way, while the Game Engine is getting things ready for the players next turn (after the A.I.'s Moves and After Cycling thought the cities, but before the player can move) the units are sorted for what is available At that time.

As for adding to the time waiting for the next turn, well I'LL WAIT JUST A BIT LONGER (and I believe that others would too) AT THE END OF TURN, IF MY GAMEPLAY TIME IS A BETTER EXPERIENCE FOR ME (i.e. not sucking the life out of me).

That's my Idea, what do you think?

Happy Yule

E_T

[Libertarian]

I "blast" others who post in an immature manner...

Physician, heal thyself.

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by Ozymandous
He's posted this at least twice in other threads and been answered and acknowledged by at least two people from Firas thus far. Maybe if they had everyone from Firaxis sign on and reply to his posts he'll have his ego adequately stroked and go away?

I don't really care what Lib posts or how often. He caught my attention this time because I too dislike the unit movement issues in this game. I have the option/choice like others to not read anybodys posts or threads. I might disagree with somebody but I believe everybody can post what they want or how often they want as long as they stay within forum rules. Free speech my man, positive or negative it should all be out in the open, it is your choice whether you want to read it, disagree with it, whatever. But to tell people not to express themselves is silly, however much you don't like what they are saying.

[Barchan]

Originally posted by Ozymandous

Essentially Jeff posted exactly as he should, acknowledging the suggestions that had been made. The previous thread(s) were full of this same crap about "why can't Firaxis stroke my "ego" some more and directly answer me", so I guess no one should have been surprised when the same person who complained about not being acknowledged WAS acknowledged but then complained about how he was answered.

*sigh* I guess in your rush to chide me for expressing my opinion, you overlooked my point entirely. It's not about Libertarian, it's about Jeff and Firaxis. Regardless of Libertarian's actions or posts, Jeff's response was a poor statement to the public on behalf of his firm. His comment wasn't for Lib's personal consumption, nor was it "off-mike". It was thrown out in the open, and it was, essentially, "we'll say something when we feel like it." I understand the concerns of Firaxis and how they don't want to feed the rumor mill with hints of possible features that may never be. And, yes, it's my opinion that the response was untactful, if not inappropriate. If Jeff were fed up with him for posting the same thing thrice, he could have said “As I’ve said previously, we don’t have any information on the possibility of these features at this time.” You don’t just tell people seeking information “when we have something concrete to say about them, we’ll tell you.” Read that carefully, pal. Leave out the word “concrete”. Now what’s it say? It says “don’t call us, we’ll call you,” and that’s a pretty poor approach to customer relations, no matter what the product is.

You didn’t by any chance work for Ford in the eighties did you?
*talking on phone*
“Fer cryin’ out loud, you dimwit! For the third time now, when we find concrete evidence that rear-end collisions cause the Pinto to burst into flames, we’ll call you!
*slams phone down*
“Jeeze, all these burn victims seem to want personal attention to their cases. What whiners!”

The bottom line is that if the public asks questions, you ought to respond either professionally, tactfully and honestly or not at all.

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by Ozymandous
Yes it is too bad programmeing has to get in the way of making a great game, of course I guess the game isn't programmed to begin with, it just auto-magically appears, right?

There are alot of great games out there that don't require a computer to play them. Its when you bring computers, programmers etc into the loop is where the trouble could start. Computers and programmers have come a long way and have done some amazing things but sometimes the complexity of making a PC game can ruin a possibly great game. All I was saying its too bad programming a group unit system into the game could be extremely difficult as stated by others. Adding this feature would improve this game would it not, therefore making it better or maybe even great IMHO.

[Ozymandous]

*sigh*

Here we go again... *sigh*

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley


Oh, you're a bright one. I thought I addressed this issue with you in another thread, I guess you though that by moving somewhere else that I wouldn't notice you eh? Nice try. You're exagerating this issue. No one is asking Firaxis for verses, flowers or royal treatment. We're asking to be treated as a customer would in a store. Would you ever talk to your customers that way, not a chance. If you don't give customers the information about the product, they simply become un-interested and go to another store. Lets talk facts, not crap. It seems like so many people are struggling with the fact that WE ARE THE CUSTOMERS! Think about this!

Yep, we are customers and Firaxis is basically a manufacturer. How often do you see people *****ing at a meat-packing plant for how McDonalds makes their hamburgers?

Yes, I know some will say the analogy isn't correct because Firaxis actually made the game that we all play (well some play) and they are responsible, but remember, they also have the work of trying to build and fix what's wrong. I'd assume Infogrames would be martketing people to expect flowery responses from, when dealing with a manufacturer, expect what you get, any information they can spare without later being accused of "lying" to people.

Ah... YES. We paid for the product didn't we! "Customer is always right". So what if they get flak'... big deal... if you take offense to what someone says in an email thousands of miles away, your not only un-proffesional but imature. Lets be serious, they have no excuse. The fact is they NEVER answer our questions.

Umm, wrong. They have responded numerous times in various threads. Even Libertarian can attest to that, even if he didn't like what they said or how they said it.

Fan: Are you currently working on the stacked movement feature?
Firaxis: I dont have any information, therefor I wont say anything.

What !@#$'n kind of answer is that? If I treated customers that way, I would get fired faster than I can say "Civ3 sucks".

As opposed to what, lying to the customers? What if they said:

"Yes we can include it, it will take some time."

Then everyone will ***** about how long it is taking and deride the company more because either it was too easy to fix (and thus they are morons because they didn't include it in the first place), or else it will be too hard to fix and come out past the "acceptable" time (and then epople will say they are morons who can't code).

What if they said:

"No, sorry we can't find a way to do it."

Then people would go more ballistic and call them all morons who can't code anything as well.

Do you see any way that Firxais can not be bashed by anyone here? I don't, except maybe to do what they did and not say anything other than "We're aware of it and will let you know when we can."

Seems pretty reasonable to me.

Then they say "no" so what! It's not like we're going to commit suicide over a game. They're answers should carry information, not vague evasive cop-outs!

Not suicide, but the Firaxis bashing would rise to unprecidented heights. To believe otherwise would show a distinct newness to these forums.

Yeah, but what they "tell" us, better carry some weight and answer our questions! Not "Sorry no information, no answer". An answer is defined by a response carrying not only helpfull information, but truth as well. Niether of those are used!

Hmm, so the "we'll let you know when we know for sure" answer isn't really an answer? WOuld you rather they promised everything and then delivered nothing (lol, some will say they already did that)?? I'd rather have them acknowledge that we want it (more than most game companies will do) and that are working on it than total silence.

Who said anything about "flowery suck-ups" .. I think your putting words in everyone's mouth.

Umm, no. When you ask, as Libertarian does, to have a long, eloquent, essentially BS response to every single post, question or suggestion you are asking for "flowery suck-ups". That's not putting words in anyone's mouth, go back and read what Libertarian said he thought would be acceptable to see exactly what he wants.

[QUOTE]Your exagerating this issue to favor your weak point. Fact is, a one on one response is not required when anyone from Firaxis can post a public message addressing all matters in the form of ONE POST. That doesn't take any time at all. Considering all the people complaining have "common" problems. get it ?/QUOTE]

Funny, I thought that's what Jeff's post said, they are addressing the issues as they can. Sure anyone at Firaxis can lie and post anything but would it be true? WOuld it concise? Should they update the webboards daily just to please a very small group of fans who post here? Maybe if they intended to do that they would have forums at the Civ3 website, don't you think? I have seen them ask for information from people here and post responses saying they are working on issues.

You don't always get what you want in life. Being an ass and DEMANDING answers in an arrogant manner usualy only gives you silence or minimal help. Take that as someone in the IT field who does do customer service on occasion, ESPECIALLY if it's not really my job in the first place.

(Translation of "my job" means they released a game that's relatively bug-free (things work as designed) and that doesn't crash all the time. Everything else is at their whim and from wanting to help their fans. Like it or lump it, that's more than a lot of game companies do).

[Heliodorus]

Another Magnanimous Post from The Gift of the Sun

Libertarian - you're not a whiner IMO. I typically enjoy your posts.

With regard to stacked movement, it's a dead horse (that I beat on a little earlier today in a previous post) that still needs fixin'.

With regard to unit activation, I think you would be best served simply by dealing with the units as the comp activates them. Very frustrating at times, but less so than trying to activate manually, only to be switched mid-stack by the computer. I don't consider this a problem in my civ games (but then I don't play on huge maps, either, because I'm running a P2-300mhz machine).

With regard to Firaxis' response: Poorly delivered. The critical piece of information to convey (regardless of the style in which to convey it) was whether stack movement IS being implemented, IS NOT being implemented, or whether the possibility of implementation IS or IS NOT being researched.

I shan't speak for Lib, but if they had just conveyed one of those four pieces of information, I wouldn't have cared if they were delivered with a vitriolic diatribe deriding the Apolyton crowd for incessant nitpicking.

So, off I go, set the controls for the heart of the sun...

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Ozymandous (sic),

Your reasoning seems to go along these lines:

All cats die. Hitler is dead. Therefore, Hitler was a cat.

Sorry but no. My reasoning stays the same, I respond to each post seperately. Sorry if that confused you.

Pay attention, or have someone read this to you. Dan told me to ask Jeff. Get it so far? Dan's "answer" was "ask Jeff".

Yes, I can read and understand everything that is said. I usually don't pick out only the things I *want* to believe and discard the rest. Can you say the same?

Now then. Dan said to "ask Jeff" because Dan said he doesn't do the developer side of the games. After you essentially harrassed and attempted to belittle him you finally switched to trying to do the same to Jeff, so yes I am following exactly what you have done so far.

Let me be sure you understand that what you are calling a response contained about as much useful information as a random quark fart.

Well, depends on your definition of "useful information." If you expected perhaps game code in the answer then yes it was useless. If you were looking for affirmation that they had acknowledged you and had added your suggestion to the list of other suggestions then I think his answer was SPOT ON.

See the difference? You asked for acknowledgement and got it, yet even THAT wasn't enough for you.

I've admitted that I was heavy-handed with Dan and Jeff, and have apologized for it. Your continuing to fuel a dead fire is an hillarious display of pathos.

Umm, no. Actually I started reading the thread again today and replied to the posts as I came to them. It was only after I had responded to a few that I saw where you admitted you were heavy-handed (even though you still tried to blame them for your rude behavior, ).

Hence my posts on the issue up until your admittance of wrong. I think I stopped reading the thread after that, until now that is.

Amusing that you continue the thread, maybe your own brand of pathos perhaps? Hmmm?

Your whole arsenal of argument — faulty syllogisms, ad hominems, tu quoques — is tiresome conceptually, yet entertaining in a sort of primative way, something like one of those pathetic yet endearing sitcoms. Married with Children or something.

I assume that was your attempt to minimize me in your mind? lol, if you want to try to make my responses irrelevant then do so with facts, not your opinion vs. mine because that won't change a thing.

You whole whine about not getting personal attention was tiresome as well, but amuisng to follow. Reminded me of my 6 year old second cousin when he wanted attention. You are more eloquent than he is I will give you that.

You're as all-over-the-place as an automated worker. Keep it up. Overall, I'm enjoying the spectacle.

Yep, I can say the same about you. Oh, you might as well give up on twisting what I say around because I can defend what I have said and how I said it (even admit if I goof without still trying to blame others), can you?

[Ozymandous]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Yep, that says a lot about you.

Originally posted by Akka le Vil


Ok, I was perhaps a little too complicated for your weak understanding. I'll try keep my explanations at a lower level since it seems you have big trouble to get it.

My weak understanding? You're kididng right? No? LOL then! You're amusing!!!

I'll try to break it down as well since you also seem to have trouble gathering a concept that differs from your own.

In your previous post, you said :
"Did Civ2 have stacked movement? Did you ever have a problem moving 20-30+ settlers around trying to terraform anything? No? Did you have the option to automate the settlers in Civ2 so they'd only clear forest or jungle or only build improvements where you didn't specifically put them? How about automatic pollution removal? Was that in Civ2?
To sum up : things were not in Civ2, so no need to complain that they were not in Civ3. Ok ? Still here ?

Then I used comparaison to make you understand that what was not a problem five or ten years ago in video games ARE actually a problem. Because video games evoluted. Aaaah, isn't it a little light of understanding that start to shines in your eyes ? Marvelous. I was afraid you were not able to grasp the concept of evolution.

Hmm, so your sole argument here is that "all games have evolved and will evolve so therefore, ALL games should be better now than they were 5 years ago". Is this correct? I just want to make sure this is what you're saying before I give examples of games published a week, month or 6 months ago that PALE in comparison to games published 5+ years ago.

Now are you a clown or just completely brain dead ?

Neither, just see things differently than you, however I CAN understand your concepts, let's see if you can follow along the same WITHOUT insults, ok?

If SOMEONE could make stacked movement in 1992/1993, it means that it CAN be done, and that it's even easier now with the power of actual computer. NOT doing it when it's proved it can easily be done, and when it's such an improvement for gameplay, is INCOMPETENCE.
Hu, I'm going fairly high in the deduction level for your reduced abilities. I hope you did not get lost in the way.

Hmm, question for you. Have you played Red Alert 2 by Westwood? If so you'll notice that the units cannot move in formations, nor can you have the production buildings queue up additional units, also you cannot have more than one building produce units of that type at a time. In other words you can't produce troops from more than one barracks even if you have more than one.

Ok, now then, have you played Age of Kings? If so you'll notice you CAN move in formation, you CAN build multiple units from multiple buildings at once.

Now then, both of these games are in the RTS genre. Since Red Alert 2 came out AFTER Age of Kings then by your logic it should have everything that Age of Kings had, correct? This despite the fact that the games had different people designing them and writing the code.

See the difference? Just because the people at one game company include a feature in their game doesn't mean that ALL games of that type will have that same feature.

Should stacked movement be added, or should it have been in the game from the start? I would think YES, it should have been there or at least added, but that DOESN'T mean it should be automatically just because another company did this feature in their game.

Still following along? Good.

The farther I go the better it is
If I had any doubt about your stupidity here is the last proof I needed.

Again, I don't remember calling you stupid in my original post to you, if so, then sorry. Bash how wrong you think my logic is all day long but STOP the personal insults, got it? Good.

I imagine : you buy a car, ten miles later it breaks, you talk about this misfortune to a friend, cursing the ill-built car, and he tell you "you should shut up, 'cause you did not built a car that was better yourself".
Or did you ?

Funny boy, really

Hmm, another bad analogy. Your original complaint, which I responded to, is this:

"it's easy to program all these things in, they should have done it"

To which I replied that unless you have actually written code for a commercial product you really DON'T know how hard or easy it is to program this stuff into the game.

Understand a little better now? Good.

Now I don't flame often as I don't think it makes anything evolve, but as you did not even understood the extremely simple things I said in my previous post, I don't think you could be explained anything anyway.

Well see, there you go. Based on what you *thought* I said you made a faulty judgement. I will say that maybe I thought you'd see what I meant originally so might not have explained myself clearly enough for you, but I *do* hope this helps in your understanding.

If you have questions feel free to ask. I'll try to answer as simply and completely as I can when I check the boards again