Joined: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 3559
Location: The Big D (etroit) area
Posted:
Fri Dec 28, 2012 12:41 am
Can't remember exactly who I first saw use the term, may have been TGG or TMM, but they referred to "Fireball Trainers". I have 17 WL guys who missed 3 first trains and I also have a 9 WL who got a third train on it's first try (it happened when I missed sending a strat and it was on maintenance).
I cannot say for sure but if not it sure seems that some guys seem to be extremely "lucky" if there isn't hosing/bonusing to training. The slow trainers I don't go for alot of trains on, especially passed a first train, regardless of WL. May just be anecdotal evidence but I'm not going to keep getting burned with guys who just cannot seem to get trains done whether there is "straight rolls" or "bonus/hose" factors involved.
_________________ A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.
Thomas Jefferson
The Consortium ArchMaster Poster
Joined: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 10144
Location: on the golf course, in the garden, reading, traveling, and now Consulting
Posted:
Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:40 am
Rainman wrote:
Back in the old days, managers wouldn't train stats until they had acquired all of the them.
Old days?
Not many are older (in both DM and age) than us.
Did not train stats until all skills were acquired?
Is that what you are talking about?
Actually, early on (many years ago) there seemed to be no qualms about raising stats early, late, or whenever.
Then came the "training the wrong stats can limit the max number of learnable skills) scare - and stat trains were ostracized.
Then, with maximum info and intelligence available, it was realized that any concept can work - depending on your warrior design and lifespan strategy - and your thorough understanding of stats/skills learning.
_________________ The Consortium: Crapmaster 2013, Crapgiver 2014; 1213 ADM graduates (40+ manager IDs) including 176K+ fights and 118K+ wins plus 4 teams with 1500+ wins (Animal Farm DM11 @2085; Bulldogs DM11 @ 1976; Lenpros DM30 @ 1792; Fandils DM46 @1727
Longshot Grandmaster Poster
Joined: Sep 30, 2012
Posts: 934
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posted:
Fri Feb 22, 2013 9:26 pm
The Consortium wrote:
Rainman wrote:
Back in the old days, managers wouldn't train stats until they had acquired all of the them.
Old days?
Not many are older (in both DM and age) than us.
Did not train stats until all skills were acquired?
Is that what you are talking about?
Actually, early on (many years ago) there seemed to be no qualms about raising stats early, late, or whenever.
Then came the "training the wrong stats can limit the max number of learnable skills) scare - and stat trains were ostracized.
Then, with maximum info and intelligence available, it was realized that any concept can work - depending on your warrior design and lifespan strategy - and your thorough understanding of stats/skills learning.
I am old too. I remember everything you just mentioned.
KidArcane Grandmaster Poster
Joined: Apr 26, 2003
Posts: 674
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posted:
Sat Feb 23, 2013 6:54 am
Well, I don't know about old.... I ran three teams in the early 90's when all the stat training was taboo until one reached whatever plateau the manager envisioned. However, I DO know that since I've been back playing (after a hiatus of over a decade) that the code/program/process for stat raising seems to be completely revised.
Perhaps everyone who's been hanging around so long simply became accustomed to it. However, until these past two years, I had NEVER had a 17 WL fighter miss his first attempt at a stat raise, much less his first three or four! Yet that has happened. I had a fighter with a 20 WL miss the first attempt to raise WL to 21!!! This just hung over my head for a long, long time. I mean REALLY??!! With a 20 WL??
I play one team now and I don't have piles of data charts sorted and organized for review, but I do have some empirical evidence to offer, and my own 2¢ to throw into the hat. And I say:
There must be another factor other than WL. I don't know if it's style, size, or a random 'luck' element. I believe there MUST be something else to it.
_________________ "Don't make me destroy you." -- Darth Vader
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum