I dont get the anger which seems to arise in these forums as soon as anybody is kindly asking for an FAQ on something. It does not hurt anyone in any way, hell I would wish for FFG to be more FAQ-able even on rule interactions which I consider clear, or crystal clear whatever the difference may be. Having something in written helps a ton if you get into an argument about a rule, in fact, often it is the only thing that works in a mid-game argument.

What I find amusing,

I have never seen anyone take xx7s, so why would anyone want triple crits?

What I find amusing,

I have never seen anyone take xx7s, so why would anyone want triple crits?

Do you mean XX-9s?

What I find amusing,

I have never seen anyone take xx7s, so why would anyone want triple crits?

Do you mean XX-9s?

Think that proves my point really.

What I find amusing,

I have never seen anyone take xx7s, so why would anyone want triple crits?

Why would anyone *not* want triple crits?

What I find amusing,

I have never seen anyone take xx7s, so why would anyone want triple crits?

Why would anyone *not* want triple crits?

I think another facet of taking XX-9s that is being overlooked is that they bypass contains. Yes, I understand not everything has those tokens, but they are becoming more common, and I was very thankful for them fighting the annoying Interdictor's 2 contain tokens while doing Precision Strike. So if you can't take black crit effects, and you don't want any blue ones, I would say while it won't be widely used, it's value has gone up.

I dont get the anger which seems to arise in these forums as soon as anybody is kindly asking for an FAQ on something. It does not hurt anyone in any way, hell I would wish for FFG to be more FAQ-able even on rule interactions which I consider clear, or crystal clear whatever the difference may be. Having something in written helps a ton if you get into an argument about a rule, in fact, often it is the only thing that works in a mid-game argument.

Its mostly because, in the past, "This Needs an FAQ!" has been synonymous with "HOW DARE YOU SAY I AM WRONG YOU ARSEBUTT!!!"

Its also partly because, concurrently, there is a lot of Rules and FAQs out there... And we still get people demanding FAQs for things that are already answered... Which leads some of us to believe that there is some sort of disrespect there to those of us who are swallowed in rules and interpretations.

Furthermore, FFG themselves tell you to come here and resolve it on the forums, before going to an FAQ... Stating "This Needs and FAQ" and not actually contributing to the discussion, again, can show a level of disrespect to those who are following the rules.

The FAQ is for a select group of questions - Questions that cannot be answered with majority consensus. One lone stickler sticking to their guns because they don't want to be "wrong" isn't grounds for an FAQ... But many, many, many times I've been hurled abuse in PMs with that very concept behind them.

Mostly, these days, I just get annoyed at people discussing Rules outside of the Rules Sub-Forum... Because its there for a reason, and one of those reasons is to, y'know, discuss rules. Discussions that take place outside generally do so on the main page, and thus, become unsearchable for someone who is searching for rules answers and discussions in the Rules Sub-Forum.

So that's why the hate.

Answered the question?

I dont get the anger which seems to arise in these forums as soon as anybody is kindly asking for an FAQ on something. It does not hurt anyone in any way, hell I would wish for FFG to be more FAQ-able even on rule interactions which I consider clear, or crystal clear whatever the difference may be. Having something in written helps a ton if you get into an argument about a rule, in fact, often it is the only thing that works in a mid-game argument.

Its mostly because, in the past, "This Needs an FAQ!" has been synonymous with "HOW DARE YOU SAY I AM WRONG YOU ARSEBUTT!!!"

Its also partly because, concurrently, there is a lot of Rules and FAQs out there... And we still get people demanding FAQs for things that are already answered... Which leads some of us to believe that there is some sort of disrespect there to those of us who are swallowed in rules and interpretations.

Furthermore, FFG themselves tell you to come here and resolve it on the forums, before going to an FAQ... Stating "This Needs and FAQ" and not actually contributing to the discussion, again, can show a level of disrespect to those who are following the rules.

The FAQ is for a select group of questions - Questions that cannot be answered with majority consensus. One lone stickler sticking to their guns because they don't want to be "wrong" isn't grounds for an FAQ... But many, many, many times I've been hurled abuse in PMs with that very concept behind them.

Mostly, these days, I just get annoyed at people discussing Rules outside of the Rules Sub-Forum... Because its there for a reason, and one of those reasons is to, y'know, discuss rules. Discussions that take place outside generally do so on the main page, and thus, become unsearchable for someone who is searching for rules answers and discussions in the Rules Sub-Forum.

So that's why the hate.

Answered the question?

I still don't get why you get all the hate-mail and me none. It's unfair it is.

I still don't get why you get all the hate-mail and me none. It's unfair it is.

The few times you disagreed with me. They extend you professional courtesy or something, even if its undeserved

I dont get the anger which seems to arise in these forums as soon as anybody is kindly asking for an FAQ on something. It does not hurt anyone in any way, hell I would wish for FFG to be more FAQ-able even on rule interactions which I consider clear, or crystal clear whatever the difference may be. Having something in written helps a ton if you get into an argument about a rule, in fact, often it is the only thing that works in a mid-game argument.

Its mostly because, in the past, "This Needs an FAQ!" has been synonymous with "HOW DARE YOU SAY I AM WRONG YOU ARSEBUTT!!!"

Its also partly because, concurrently, there is a lot of Rules and FAQs out there... And we still get people demanding FAQs for things that are already answered... Which leads some of us to believe that there is some sort of disrespect there to those of us who are swallowed in rules and interpretations.

Furthermore, FFG themselves tell you to come here and resolve it on the forums, before going to an FAQ... Stating "This Needs and FAQ" and not actually contributing to the discussion, again, can show a level of disrespect to those who are following the rules.

The FAQ is for a select group of questions - Questions that cannot be answered with majority consensus. One lone stickler sticking to their guns because they don't want to be "wrong" isn't grounds for an FAQ... But many, many, many times I've been hurled abuse in PMs with that very concept behind them.

Mostly, these days, I just get annoyed at people discussing Rules outside of the Rules Sub-Forum... Because its there for a reason, and one of those reasons is to, y'know, discuss rules. Discussions that take place outside generally do so on the main page, and thus, become unsearchable for someone who is searching for rules answers and discussions in the Rules Sub-Forum.

So that's why the hate.

Answered the question?

I still don't get why you get all the hate-mail and me none. It's unfair it is.

Probably because you respond in none tldr fashion and don't italicize every other word which can be interpreted as being talked down to. It's the Internet.

Funny. IRL I'm generally considered curt, impatient, and much too candid.

I think I'll spend more time on the internetz.