Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Zeldor, I can fix the Agartha bug if you are so inclined..

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

QM promised to release a fix tomorrow. I can fix that bug too if he won't do it :) It's just 1 line.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

I sent in the wrong pretender, do I just email the new one to llamaserv?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Yep.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Sooo we've 24 pretenders submitted. When do we start?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Sorry I have not had a chance to release the new version today as promised. However, as Zeldor says it's trivial to create an unofficial patch for that one issue.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

As I mentioned to QM
I've got it done:

Fixed the Fenris/Black bull bug,
the skratti bug (no upkeep)
the Agarth blindfighter
and lowered the cost of the hoburg priest in keeping with
the other hoburg changes.
And one other bug where the unit didn't have an end statement.

do you want it Zeldor?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Yeah. I was going to change just blindfighter, but you can give your version :)

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Ok, I'm not waiting for chrispedersen. He didn't show up with hix fixes for a whole day, so I just fixed Blindlord bug and here is 1.41b, I am starting the game with that.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

The Following mod needs to be installed: Single Age mod.dm

I thought we were using SingleAgeComplete.dm?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

yeah... is there a link to the mod you wish us to d/l, or is this a llamaserver thingie?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Yeah. Just make a copy and rename it to match. Llamabeast still didn't fix it.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Make a copy of your SingleAgeComplete.dm and rename it to "Single Age mod.dm". It is llamaserver problem with multiage games. We had to do the same for Preponderance.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (submit pretenders!!)
 

Yeah I was out all day. Plus I don't know a way to send you something, anyway.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

we are just waiting on man

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Second to last to submit and I got the most evil set of random events I have yet seen on a second turn, must be karma :sick:

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

MA Mictlan really misunderstood how to expand :) His neighbour must be happy.

P.S. Found my neighbour already. That will be interesting fight. I hoped for someone a bit weaker...

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

It's a crapshoot alright. In another game where I have turmoil 3 luck 3 I have had little events at all in 11 turns. In a test I did to see how my forces would fare against another for that game I got a few 1000 gold events and a bunch of other, almost 3 a turn every turn... Curse you chance... curse you!

Um I mean...chance is awesome (crosses fingers)

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

the nation of MA Mictlan would like a moment of silence for our brave slinger, who so selflessly gave his life for the greater good.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Well, I haven't seen the turn, but I suspect I know what it means. Congratulations =)

I've posted for a sub = ).

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Why are you quitting?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Because he suffered a setback ?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

I'm posting to let everyone know I am refusing to join another MP game where chrispedersen is playing. Because that is a damned joke.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

less ragging on chris and more poasting about my glorious victory :judge:

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Hmm strange, I did not automatically receive my turn. I had to request a resend from Llamaserver.

I am guessing problems with either Hotmail or Llamas mail server. I have never had problems with his server before though.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Situation like that happens, it's quite rare though.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

For the record, I also did not receive my turn, without asking for it to be resent.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Lulululuz. Ohnoes, a stale ;.;

Jazzepi

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

I noticed Jotun staled anyway. I realize it sucks to lose your pretender but it would be decent of you to play on and stick it out rather than dump this to a sub or just stale.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Hey guys,

First: I had no intention of staling I had set it to AI and looked for a sub. But I have staled intermittently on several games recently.

However, said efforts were a bit sabotaged by KissBlade. And I have since heard about this in other games.

Usually I don't comment about games, but I've gotten so much grief about it, I thought I would comment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Everyone approaches a game with different strategies. There are bless strategies, rainblow pretender strategies. Hordes of undead strategies.

I personally consider Jotun one of the weakest of the giants. However, like other races, their pretenders are reasonable. And unusually we had fixed starts in this game. So I wanted to go for quick dominion kill strategy.

The vehicle for this was a Carrion dragon with Dom 10. To accomplish this, scales are mostly in the -2 to -3 range. I carefully maxed out the dragons combat ability by adding earth and death, having more than 203 hp and prot 20+.

In more than 10 test games, I was able to accomplish dominion death prior to turn 6. The quick accomplishment of a second castle balancing the lack of scales.

In this particular case, I got unlucky in at a couple of areas. First, despite the prot 20, the first couple of hits on the dragon yielded crippled and never healing wound. And secondly, dominion death didn't occur even though my opponent did not have an awake pretender.

The manual, page 93: gives a good reason why this strategy usally works.

My pretender, generates one dominion, and with my opponent having one candle (all he ever had) - I have two additional checks at 95% to generate two additional candles.

So, the math is (more or less)
Me: 1+2x95%
Oppeonent: three temple checks. Usually dominion is around 7. Usually, he will score 2 dominion checks. And, if a player did not prophetize its usually game over.

I don't want to get into math too much, but I'll note a few other considerations. If the player took an awake pretender there was about a 50/50 shot of intercepting it and killing the pretender.

Additionally, the rules on dominion spread favored me - because my opponents temple spreads could have spread to adjacent territories, which would have boosted the hp and strength of my god. (Strength is important as it affects the range of a dragons breath weapon.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
So, none of this happened, my pretender died.

So what would you have me do? I think most people would agree the position is irretreviably broken.

I personally did not say anything, to avoid disturbing the game, but as other people obviously were, I thought perhaps to clear the air, or at least express my side of it.

The strategy I chose was an unusual strategy - but it was a legitimate strategy, with reasonable chances of success. And I didn't just choose it to spoil a game.

Is there anything significantly different from what I did, and a standard turn 6 bless rush? Other than losing, of course = ).

So, I think it is obvious that the position is broken; we have all dropped positions that we recognized as broken. In what way does me playing the position a few more turns make the game any better than setting it to ai? In what way is the game damaged by me dropping?

Or is the idea that I should have to play, and live with the strategy, ie., ' punish me' for trying a different strategy (and failing)? I don't think it makes the game better - but if its really necessary.. ok. Although my opponent has expressed a preference that I just resign.

As a note, I offered the position to my opponent - and even he didn't want it = ).

Anyway, I hope that removes a little bit of the mystery, and shows that I'm not just quitting in a fit of pique.

Best wishes..

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

i think your analysis is faulty. you can't compare getting dominion deaths in test games against the AI and against human opponents. the AI is stupid, and might not preach, and often has horrendous dominion scores - how did you determine the AI had dom 7?

also, as a minor note, the second wound was chest wound, not crippled, which is very minor for a zero enc pretender.


anyways, I personally have no problems w/ you staling out - my income is currently about 10% that of the leaders' :D

fight on though if you wish - i'm of course game.

edit: MA Mictlan is proud to point out that they doubled the size of their empire last turn! who else amongst you can say the same!11 :p

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

I'm sure it would break his heart to have the valley all to himself by turn 7. :re:

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

wait, excuse me, I missed that part.

I said that I would prefer that chrisp continue to fight. My reference to resigning was in response to chrisp's pm upon killing my patrolling army and besieging my cap on turn 3: he asked me to resign, as he would also be getting a sieging army there in 2 turns (which was a lie, and funnily enough, if he had actually tried that he would have had a territory for his god to retreat to :D.

Here's from my own PM after chris announces he's going to quit:

I was just arguing against scamming some poor noob into taking over an awful position w/ LA ermorian scales and a dead 800 pt pretender, one unlikely to come back for a fair while, given jotun's priests...

As such, ChrisP's claim that I expressed a preference that he resign is a bald-faced lie. It was he, after jumping me and when I had a total of 11 troops left in the whole game, and no mages, tried to get me to resign, so that he would have a better chance... I'm happy to quote chris's own pms to me if he wishes.

Also, how the fsck do i get the whole valley to myself by turn 7 when I have 2 territories now, Jim? I have 2 territories, 20 troops, and an income this turn of a 100 gold - and somehow this translates into me having the whole valley? go f yourself.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Excuse me?

Anyway, you are bounded by large indie garrisons. My point was that no matter how dire your situation may be atm, since most people are either already in, or about to start a painful early war - in about a year you would likely be one of the strongest nations in the game.

And I always thought you were nice.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

I don't like having lies told about me. And, no, I'm not nice. What ever gave you that impression?

at least i'm not a retard :D

I have 2 territories. even a moron should realize that's not a whole valley. As to wars, i've suffered more loss than anyone else in the game so far, and yet I am emerging victorious due to a successful SC kill. That's how it works. You can whah whah all you want; I have little doubt that your puny and poorly managed nation will have it's come-uppance soon enough :)

edit: also, ChrisP's dracolich strategy wasn't necessarily a bad one. It had a very good chance of working, though his analysis of dom kill likelyhood was well off.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Damn...

A few points arch might be right that it was a chest wound - I don't have the turn result from turn 2, yet overall what I said was roughly accurate. The combat results (crippled chest wound) in the first few hits was fairly unlucky (especially against pd chaff). And I do believe I got a NHW .. but if it was later..mea culpa.

Second.. I would never *scam out* the position. I never have. I would tell (whomever expressed interest) the actual facts.

Third, As I had already said to you I wasn't continueing if I lost, I really think my wording actually reflected the available options. However, arch if you would rather I said 'my opponent has expressed a preference that I resign rather than sub the position out' I accept that.

Likewise, I did say I was sending a force to get there in two turns. That was the plan. Casualties made it not work. I don't think its appropriate to call that a lie either. I'm a pretender, what I project to happen doesn't necessarily come true.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Regarding the strategy, I simulated it many many times, both versus myself, and against AI's.

I wasn't saying that the average AI Dom was a 7. I was saying that I expected good results against players, as the average bless in MP seems to be around a 7. Plugging that into the formulas for dominion spread, and empirical evidence suggested reasonable prospects of success.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I really do not want to ignite a fire storm. Nor do I want to impugn arch in any fashion... he has been the model of good sportsmanship.

Hell, I can only hope if someone dropped a dragon on me on turn two, that I'd respond as graciously. Again, it was only because I was getting a lot of questions (and some quite unkind remarks) that I wanted to explain a little bit about the strategy, and why dropping was a reasonable course of action.

Best to all

By the way.. I *am* having a problem with the server. I have tried on multiple occassions now to submit a turn, and it continues to reject the turn saying wrong turn number. The last time, for turn 7. I have restarted the turn from scratch, deleted the .2h file.. and still no luck.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

My preference, clearly stated in my PM that I quoted, was that you continue fighting, but that resigning was better than finding some poor schlub to take over a position even you don't want.
fair enough. I have no idea what was happening w/ your expansion force, though it seemed to have been able to gain a territory/turn.

I would guess half the nations in this game have an awake SC and a dom of 9 or so. Very few will have a dom of 7 or less; even those could probably negate dom kill by preaching, unless you managed to kill their prophet.

edit: delete the 2h and the trn file, have the turn file resent, and try again.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

In terms of the viability of the strategy as a whole.. I kept the score tables from turn one.. (not that it would have mattered I was pretty much committed with this build).

8 nations started with awake pretenders. The total dominion score was 1100+, dividing by the players yielded an average dominion of 46. My dominion score was 69 (with a 10 dominion)

So the average dominion was roughly 2/3 of mine, rounding up.. 7.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Classic.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Here is the problem on how you handled your game.

You went into the game with an all or nothing strat in hopes of blind luck looking in your favor rather than actual strategy. I believe that you fully intended on quitting/subbing/staling if anything even went wrong with your start. I would not have minded this as much if not for a few factors.

After you got lucky enough to bump into a nation that didn't take a SC pretender god, you tried to get him to flat out resign to you to give you an undeserved leg up in the game. "It was he, after jumping me and when I had a total of 11 troops left in the whole game, and no mages, tried to get me to resign, so that he would have a better chance..."

This was annoying enough.

Second, if you truly decided your game is over (hardly since Archae is in an awful spot as well) then saying, "good game" and getting the last few turns over with would've been proper form. Heck, even doing some half assed turns or worse, staling is better form than /lying/ about your position to get a sub.

Also I don't believe a word you said about you couldn't expand due to losses. Your army graph never dipped and you had constant province growth.

As for your "test games" and claim that "the manual said it would work!" I don't know whether to laugh or shake my head.

As I said, I refuse to join another game that you're playing. Laters.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

KissBlade..

I'm not going to stoop to the same level. I will merely point out:

I sent congratulations to arch, even before I opened the turn.

Before this conversation, I reported to llama that I was having problems, first with getting the turn (check back in this thread), and then secondly everytime I submit a turn it says wrong turn number.

Third: It is rather usual to start a *second* army.
As I never expanded *2* - do you think that is just remotely possible it might be because my expansion with my *first* army was thwarted? Or do you really think that, having spent 800 points on a SC, I would have preferred leaving him no space to which to retreat?

Fourth - Someone that is relying on blind luck, would neither keep the scores table, nor analyze. I've cut an pasted it below.

Best Wishes


LlamaServer Scores, Madness turn 2
Provinces
Nation Provinces
Independents 389
MA Arcoscephale 1
MA Man 1
MA Mictlan 1
MA Agartha 1
MA Caelum 1
MA C'tis 1
MA Pangaea 1
MA Vanheim 1
MA Jotunheim 2
MA Bandar Log 1
MA Shinuyama 1
LA Arcoscephale 1
LA Man 1
LA Ulm 1
LA Marignon 2
LA Mictlan 1
LA T'ien Ch'i 1
LA Agartha 1
LA Abysia 1
LA Pangaea 1
LA Midgard 1
LA Utgard 1
LA Pythium 1
LA Bogarus 1

Forts
Nation Forts
Independents 0
MA Arcoscephale 1
MA Man 1
MA Mictlan 1
MA Agartha 1
MA Caelum 1
MA C'tis 1
MA Pangaea 1
MA Vanheim 1
MA Jotunheim 1
MA Bandar Log 1
MA Shinuyama 1
LA Arcoscephale 1
LA Man 1
LA Ulm 1
LA Marignon 1
LA Mictlan 1
LA T'ien Ch'i 1
LA Agartha 1
LA Abysia 1
LA Pangaea 1
LA Midgard 1
LA Utgard 1
LA Pythium 1
LA Bogarus 1

Income
Nation Income
Independents 30050
MA Arcoscephale 713
MA Man 748
MA Mictlan 600
MA Agartha 391
MA Caelum 541
MA C'tis 735
MA Pangaea 315
MA Vanheim 963
MA Jotunheim 450
MA Bandar Log 657
MA Shinuyama 1133
LA Arcoscephale 360
LA Man 829
LA Ulm 164
LA Marignon 516
LA Mictlan 356
LA T'ien Ch'i 705
LA Agartha 470
LA Abysia 314
LA Pangaea 985
LA Midgard 786
LA Utgard 658
LA Pythium 663
LA Bogarus 808

Gem Income
Nation Gem Income
Independents 255
MA Arcoscephale 5
MA Man 5
MA Mictlan 5
MA Agartha 5
MA Caelum 5
MA C'tis 5
MA Pangaea 5
MA Vanheim 5
MA Jotunheim 5
MA Bandar Log 5
MA Shinuyama 5
LA Arcoscephale 4
LA Man 4
LA Ulm 4
LA Marignon 4
LA Mictlan 5
LA T'ien Ch'i 4
LA Agartha 4
LA Abysia 4
LA Pangaea 4
LA Midgard 4
LA Utgard 4
LA Pythium 4
LA Bogarus 4

Research
Nation Research
Independents 0
MA Arcoscephale 8
MA Man 0
MA Mictlan 0
MA Agartha 0
MA Caelum 0
MA C'tis 13
MA Pangaea 14
MA Vanheim 0
MA Jotunheim 0
MA Bandar Log 29
MA Shinuyama 8
LA Arcoscephale 11
LA Man 0
LA Ulm 0
LA Marignon 0
LA Mictlan 0
LA T'ien Ch'i 0
LA Agartha 0
LA Abysia 44
LA Pangaea 0
LA Midgard 0
LA Utgard 38
LA Pythium 14
LA Bogarus 11

Dominion
Nation Dominion
Independents 0
MA Arcoscephale 48
MA Man 24
MA Mictlan 45
MA Agartha 56
MA Caelum 35
MA C'tis 66
MA Pangaea 69
MA Vanheim 45
MA Jotunheim 69
MA Bandar Log 23
MA Shinuyama 45
LA Arcoscephale 59
LA Man 34
LA Ulm 24
LA Marignon 79
LA Mictlan 22
LA T'ien Ch'i 44
LA Agartha 35
LA Abysia 67
LA Pangaea 56
LA Midgard 34
LA Utgard 34
LA Pythium 56
LA Bogarus 57

Army Size
Nation Army Size
Independents 32000
MA Arcoscephale 85
MA Man 56
MA Mictlan 98
MA Agartha 74
MA Caelum 123
MA C'tis 94
MA Pangaea 86
MA Vanheim 65
MA Jotunheim 76
MA Bandar Log 76
MA Shinuyama 65
LA Arcoscephale 71
LA Man 68
LA Ulm 60
LA Marignon 57
LA Mictlan 112
LA T'ien Ch'i 119
LA Agartha 68
LA Abysia 62
LA Pangaea 100
LA Midgard 74
LA Utgard 68
LA Pythium 46
LA Bogarus 80

Victory Points
Nation Victory Points
Independents 2
MA Arcoscephale 1
MA Man 1
MA Mictlan 1
MA Agartha 1
MA Caelum 1
MA C'tis 1
MA Pangaea 1
MA Vanheim 1
MA Jotunheim 1
MA Bandar Log 1
MA Shinuyama 1
LA Arcoscephale 1
LA Man 1
LA Ulm 1
LA Marignon 1
LA Mictlan 1
LA T'ien Ch'i 1
LA Agartha 1
LA Abysia 1
LA Pangaea 1
LA Midgard 1
LA Utgard 1
LA Pythium 1
LA Bogarus 1




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return to game page

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Arch,

So how did you manage to kill Jotun's pretender anyway?

I assume it was a retreat kill due to afflictions?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

He is the other Mictlan, so a heavily blessed troops powered defeat?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

I had 2 unarmored slingers in the front, to catch his breath, which is pretty useless anyways.

one prophet nearish the front, who divine blessed then mixed up smites and sermons.

one mictlan tribal king, w/ a purchased vine whip, and 2 jaguar guards, on one side.

7 jags on the other.

The vine whip only hit twice i think, but still helped. The morale on the jags varied widely, from 8 to 21 i think, due to sermons and the draco lich's +12 fear (also awe +2); but they mostly held.

Draco had 180 base -36 for dominion -36 for neverhealing wound, for a total of 138 hp (:p). he was not crippled; chest wound does nothing.

Pounded on him w/ large sharp-edged chunks of obsidian until he retreated into *poof*

the king and his guards had broken, but the other 7 were still in high dudgeon.

one brave slinger gave his life for his god and nation.

The key to this was to deny the beast his attacks. The vine whip helped, but mostly it was the Twist of Fate on the Jags, especially as the AI does not prioritise units who have already lost their Twist. So damage was minimal, and did not feed into loss of morale.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Well, to be fair, when I took over Gath for you in Kingmaker, after I PMed you for info on the build and intended strat (I had never even tried Gath before), my reply was from Zeldor or Xietor (can't remember who was admin at the start), asking for my email for the position. I never got the info..... And when I subbed Niefelheim in World In Crisis, you let the game stale again rather than just buying a Jarl and submitting as I asked, and when I saw the scales (3 Drain, weee!), lack of research, low gold income, and almost nonexistent gem income, well I didn't want to play them. ;)


But, I still like you loads better than Archaeolept, who likes to lash out at people who try to give encouragement.

Oh and BTW Arch, be happy there are forum rules that I am inclined to follow, even if you like to dance around them with your infantile allusions, "at least I'm not a retard". Very smooth. :re:

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Jim.

by singling out that quote from chris, which was probably just sloppiness on his part, and making it your post, you imputed something to me that was false and slanderous. You could have verified your facts, but did not, and instead tried to drag my name in the mud. Exactly how that constituted "giving encouragement" is clearly beyond my powers of comprehension.

And now you whine.

the gods be praised.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

Drag your name in the mud? Are you just completely insane? That quote clearly said it was made by Chris, and clearly had not been in any way confirmed.

I am still finding it hard to believe that you are so pissed off about such a small comment, made by someone who didn't even know what was going on in your little part of the world. Take a good look at what is going on here, and you'll discover that the only person whining and crying here, is not me. I'm just defending myself from an unreasonable and unwarranted verbal assault.

Seriously, you've been on the internet at least 5 years, I can't believe you've made it this long if you take offense at these things.

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

The rolleyes are a favourite of passive-aggressives everywhere, and it really makes your post. You are implying sarcasm vis a vis an imputed internal state on my part; ie. you are saying that I am the contrary of heart-broken, that I am pleased or exultant to not have any opposition to fight. This is a slur, and I will teach your nation manners. :)

The internet is all about taking offense to things - you haven't noticed?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

well maybe Jim's comment can be read in that way, but aren't your reaction slightly over the top here archaeo ?

Re: Madness - 24 players, MA+LA, CBM 1.4 (running)
 

nope :)

if he wants to impute my inner mental states, and implicitly whine about how "easy" i've got it, I'll feel free to respond, thank you very much.

next time, perhaps he will consider the implications of what he says. Conceivably he will actually learn something, possibly, eventually.