[ QUOTE ]
a hella-damage (at least compared to anything /ice) PBAoE hold with a 5 enemy cap and each on short enough timers to keep almost everything knocked or held for the entire fight
[/ QUOTE ]
Bwahuh?
Do you mean Fault? In which case you're wrong on, uh... just about every particular. It's a ranged AoE 10 target stun and KD, but no damage.
"The gaping maw of your mind is filled with layered circles upon circles of bloody razors, I am finding."
- Twoflower
[ QUOTE ]
_Castle_ Thanks for the response, I want to outline a point on Frozen Aura. Since it is a sleep it makes it a real issue to use effectively in its current incarnation. I am sure you have read Ice Melee 1, 2 and 3 and have seen the boatload of suggestions that have been made. The only Tanker that can benefit from FA in its current form is an Inv/Ice Melee tank which is the rarest Tanker combination.
[ QUOTE ]
So, what's the solution? Currently, there isn't one. Tankers, as a whole, do better than average, and this includes Ice Melee. My focus is on those AT's who, as a group, underperform. I may be able to take some time to make some changes during the I11 beta, or afterwards, but it entirely depends on how things are going. No promises!
[/ QUOTE ]
I would love to see a positive change to Frozen Aura and I know 99 % of Ice Melee Tanks would appreciate it. Heck I am happy that its being considered. Thanks for your response on this matter.
[/ QUOTE ]
I just wanted to add that I'd love to see this changed as well. I used to make post after post back in the old days, but like most, I just gave up after a while. I've never been happy with Ice Melee, and while it (Ice Melee) can be fun at times, Frozen Aura seems like the most frustrating power that I've had with any character. It feels backwards and weak, and to get something like that as a tier 9 power...
Thanks, Castle, for at least responding to these posts. Maybe you can drag Geko back over to the City of.. side of the office and put him back to work for you. 
The Dark Blade
"I've felt your mouse on me before, you perv...." - Troy Hickman
Paragon Wiki
[ QUOTE ]
I think the point is the fact that Ice Patch can do that at all times. While granted, it's only five targets, that's five targets that can essentially be permanently removed from the fight.
[/ QUOTE ]
I constantly get hit by targets that are flopping on ice patch. It only affects 5 targets, and is only an 8% chance to knockdown every 0.2 seconds. It is a good power, and I don't want to make it sound like I think it sucks, but it is nowhere close to permanently removing 5 targets. And if I pop out a burn patch along with the ice patch, I very often see 2-4 of my ice patch victims escape the patch, turn, attack me from range, and maybe then come back to the patch to fight.
And while Seismic Smash does come much later, once a tanker has it, the power actually can be slotted to permanently remove 5 enemies. With just 2 SOs, it can be brought to 12 second recharge. Go with IOs to make it even better. Unslotted for hold it's 9.5 seconds against even level. It even has an accuracy bonus, so you probably don't need 2 Accs in it.
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
Seismic Smash is single target. If you take Hasten and slot it like a hold (which is crazy, as it does Total Focus damage), you could maybe, maybe keep two targets perma held, so long as they are evencon.
While I'm not arguing that Ice is a better control set than Stone (because it isn't), your argument's kinda based on facts that are, not to put to fine a point on it, not factual.
Edit: It occurs to me that I know where you're getting the five targets from. City of Data, yes? That's just the punchvoke effect. If you check other tank ST attacks you'll see they have the same thing.
"The gaping maw of your mind is filled with layered circles upon circles of bloody razors, I am finding."
- Twoflower
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I am really sorry I couldn't get you all the changes the set needs.
[/ QUOTE ]
So, why does Frozen Aura get ignored? There've been many threads on this here in the forums, the gist of which is that a PBAoE SLEEP doesn't add anything to a Tankers Repertoire. Since any Aura power interrupts Sleep effects, and Tankers essentially *must* run auras to fulfill their roll, it is counterproductive.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'd also contend that your own /Fire Blaster has the same issue with Its secondary's Teir-9 -- It adds nothing to their Survival ...meanwhile a certain Farming build with the same power by level 8 gets an exponential benefit beyond yours and is turning both your home-zone of PI, and the market you worked so hard on, into the biggest cesspools this game has seen since the days of fire-tank herding and Hydra-farming.
As far as their intended effects go, I'd point to Irony and say they were switched at Birth
[ QUOTE ]
I just wanted to add that I'd love to see this changed as well. I used to make post after post back in the old days, but like most, I just gave up after a while. I've never been happy with Ice Melee, and while it can be fun at times, Frozen Aura seems like the most frustrating power that I've had with any character. It feels backwards and weak, and to get something like that as a tier 9 power...
[/ QUOTE ]It would be nice if the devs would start a thread on fixing/replacing Frozen Aura like the thread on Defiance.
I think it is sensible that the ice tier 9 offer more control, but that sleep is just an awful control choice. It would be better as an aoe debuff. Something like -20% to speeds, recharge, damage and accuracy.
ice melee is stupidly overpowered with that ice patch. not a thing should be changed. that's basically control for clearing mobs as is.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Then your Freezing Touch is not slotted as well as your Seismic Smash, because Freezing Touch lasts longer (I'd say around 20% longer) and recharges 20% faster.
[/ QUOTE ]
try again. I know, I added the slotting after you replied.
FT has a 1 sec cast, Seismic has a 1.5 sec... not a big difference, especially when you look at how much damage the two do.
[/ QUOTE ]
I know, I'm not comparing the two themselves, I'm simply saying: add that 1.5 seconds (*3 since it's three uses) to the recharge, and you suddenly aren't able to perma-hold three bosses.
[/ QUOTE ]
EDIT: I misunderstood this power. NVM...
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
[ QUOTE ]
Seismic Smash is single target. If you take Hasten and slot it like a hold (which is crazy, as it does Total Focus damage), you could maybe, maybe keep two targets perma held, so long as they are evencon.
While I'm not arguing that Ice is a better control set than Stone (because it isn't), your argument's kinda based on facts that are, not to put to fine a point on it, not factual.
Edit: It occurs to me that I know where you're getting the five targets from. City of Data, yes? That's just the punchvoke effect. If you check other tank ST attacks you'll see they have the same thing.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yup. Way screwed up on this. Thanks for the info. Realized after I made 3 stupid posts...
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
I have to agree with Castle here. I just leveled a Ice/Mace Tank to 50. By forum logic this should have been near impossible as both sets are considered the worst of their groups.
But the fact is I had little trouble even solo doing missions on Invincible. Sure I skipped the tier 9 power in Ice but there are a lot of sets with marginal tier 9 powers like MoG on a Stalker (having a high resistance doesn't help when it only leaves you 3 HPs).
In PvP this may not be the strongest build but it is still very playable. There are others that have it a lot rougher. Icicles alone make the set very nice (and I think offset Mace's lower damage).
----------------------------
You can't please everyone, so lets concentrate on me.
Any sets, no matter how bad they are, can function in PvE. to say otherwise is silly.
[ QUOTE ]
I have to agree with Castle here. I just leveled a Ice/Mace Tank to 50. By forum logic this should have been near impossible as both sets are considered the worst of their groups.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's been a long time since ice/ was considered the worst. It's actually a damn good set since defense was fixed.
[ QUOTE ]
But the fact is I had little trouble even solo doing missions on Invincible. Sure I skipped the tier 9 power in Ice but there are a lot of sets with marginal tier 9 powers like MoG on a Stalker (having a high resistance doesn't help when it only leaves you 3 HPs).
[/ QUOTE ]
It's not that /mace is viewed as an unholy union of unusable and unplayable, but rather that it underperforms the other secondaries (except /ice). Anything in the game can solo to 50, if you are willing to put in the time. The relevant question here is how long did it take you do get there, and how would that compare to getting there as a /fire, /stone, or /SS?
[ QUOTE ]
In PvP this may not be the strongest build but it is still very playable. There are others that have it a lot rougher. Icicles alone make the set very nice (and I think offset Mace's lower damage).
[/ QUOTE ]
I have about 2 hours total PvP experience, and as my recent posting has shown - I should spend even less time talking about things I haven't experienced than things I have experienced.
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
[ QUOTE ]
ice melee is stupidly overpowered with that ice patch. not a thing should be changed. that's basically control for clearing mobs as is.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ahhh, nice troll. I love ice patch, but calling it stupidly overpowered is so inaccurate that this cannot be a serious post.
EDIT: Partially fixed my continuing saga of stupid in this thread.
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are
[ QUOTE ]
ice melee is stupidly overpowered with that ice patch. not a thing should be changed. that's basically control for clearing mobs as is.
[/ QUOTE ]
thanks for actually reading the thread...
YMMV---IMO
Ice Ember
[ QUOTE ]
I have to agree with Castle here. I just leveled a Ice/Mace Tank to 50. By forum logic this should have been near impossible as both sets are considered the worst of their groups.
But the fact is I had little trouble even solo doing missions on Invincible. Sure I skipped the tier 9 power in Ice but there are a lot of sets with marginal tier 9 powers like MoG on a Stalker (having a high resistance doesn't help when it only leaves you 3 HPs).
In PvP this may not be the strongest build but it is still very playable. There are others that have it a lot rougher. Icicles alone make the set very nice (and I think offset Mace's lower damage).
[/ QUOTE ]
ice primary is very nice with th defense changes made. skipping hibernate is a way to go? but I dont agree with it. I love my ice/stone tank and think that it is stupidly powerful now.
mace... ehh, my mace is lvl 8, but it does more damage than my icer. it already has an attack as strong as ices highest damaging attack.
I do think mace needs help as well, the stun needs to be more reliable I think, but I am not that experienced with the set.
YMMV---IMOIce Ember
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well I slot my seismic smash Acc/mez HO, 2 dam/mez HOs and 3 makos, dam/rech, acc/end/rech, acc/dam/end/rech and I'm gimped on this power how ? According to mids, this gives me 18.6s hold duration with a recharge of 9.76s when hasten is not up (I have some +rech set bonuses), and 7.27s when it is. If I didn't bother with the extra makos set bonus and but a pure recharge in instead of the dam/rech, would be even better and double stackable all the time without hasten.
Also remember fault will combine with boxing (10% chance) and stone fist (10% chance) to stun bosses even when they're not held, and in fact fault will self stack most of the time anyway. Mine lasts 16.9s and with hasten up recharges in 7.8 (10.7 without) so you can AoE stun bosses as well as hold them (and perma stun even con bosses).
Lady Lahar 50 ice/stone Virtue and 13 other 50s
[/ QUOTE ]
I did not say slotting damage is gimping you. You must also realize that that's well over thirty million influence in enhancements, or so I recall. That's a big investment, and it obviously paid off.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now I'll make you weep, even though I was only level 30 at the time, I knew I was going to slot like this, so I went to WWs a few days into I9 and bought about 30 peroxisomes across several toons and servers at 100K each, and the acc/mez for 3M, so no it cost me nothing like 30M.
I dropped the LotG uniques off Katies to get the recharge.
It's true. This game is NOT rocket surgery. - BillZBubba
[ QUOTE ]
Edit: And hi Castle! How about going one section up and saying something for Stalkers!
[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe if you, myself and the couple others who're routinely pushing/discussing Stalker improvements made an apology-for-our-failure thread we'd get somewhere
See, I recognized that nothing was ever going to be done to help ice melee a LONG time ago, which is why I never bothered contributing here. My time testing for them and posting constructively on the forum has been ignored by the current powers that be, so I figure why bother?
Well, that and essentially being told to 'butt out' of previous threads in this regard.
This is a team that honestly thinks that ice melee and energy melee are remotely balanced. And that it's completely sensible for something like icicles to be lethal-only damage when an ice sword is lethal and cold.
You can't argue with illogic like that.
So this is why I retired my ice tanker for the most part after i hit 50 on it oh, in issue 4? Break her out and spec her every issue to endure the new nerfs, but that's about it (give or take an experiment or two in warburg, or with IOs, or whatever).
Speaking of the Old Ice Tankers home, I don't even see Circeus and Archimedes any more... hrm....
Arch is still around, but Circeus took off well before I9.
Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.
~Ralph Waldo Emerson
"I was just the one with the most unsolicited sombrero." - Traegus
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Goes against everything I've seen in the game. I've seen /Stone tankers out control me, and most every other tanker secondary can out-damage me. Based on my experiences in the game, I don't get how the above is true at all. The mathematical experiments we've run in versions of Tundara's thread don't back it up either.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem with most mathematical experiments I see here in the forums is that they are measuring the extremities of performance. The datamining I do shows how players are actually performing in the "reality" of the game. The two are related, but there is often a vast gulf between what a set is capable of and what it is typically asked to do in gameplay.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is why the OP and many others come away from these marathon threads with little to cheer about. Theoretical analysis and static modeling is a weak tool since we do not actually know how much of the game mechanics truly operate. Some users work miracles of analysis to suggest foo and then sometime later the response comes that datamining says bar.
Without access to the raw performance data statistically minded users are groping in the dark. Since the devs do not release that data we can't help them in a "many hands make light work" sort of way. We can't question or confirm their answers that one AT or powerset or power is better or worse by some measure or other that can be confirmed and reviewed.
I do not believe Cryptic attempts to deceive or mislead us when they respond in these forums, but we don't know what questions they ask when they datamine and therefore can't point out biases or other issues that might make a material difference in the context of a larger discussion.
I've made this point since beta: good datamining/statistical analysis is very hard to do; the hardest part is coming up with the right questions to ask based on the data thats collected. Next hardest is showing that the facts mined from the data actually answer the question being asked. Bias, wishful thinking, etc. can creep in at any point - it's why peer-review is the gold-standard for serious scientific/statistical publishing in the real world.
We are not peers - we are customers. Cryptic is fully within its rights to not let us peer behind the curtain. Since that isn't likely to change, I predict that we'll see new forum discussions in the future following the same pattern as this one.
Ohmi
[/ QUOTE ]
Let me give my perspective on this. Although this will be a little longish, I promise there's no real math, and people actually interested in addressing problems with Ice melee, or any set for that matter, might want to hear me out.
The first rule of getting anything changed is: know how Cryptic works. This is critical.
Castle does not set priorities. Castle cannot, as a rule, make up his own projects. Positron sets the overall work priorities for the game, along with the supporting cast of suits managing the CoH/CoV game. So no amount of asking Castle to "fix Ice melee" will allow Castle to redesign a powerset, something that takes more than a couple minutes to perform, review, test and get approval for. Even I beat up on Castle more than I should to look at things when I know that he probably doesn't have the discretion to do so: its not his fault.
We *can* get Castle's attention though, and Castle *does* have some involvement in datamining for CoX. So if the playerbase says "Ice Melee sucks" and Castle thinks there's something to that, he can attempt to datamine to find out if it does, in fact, suck. If it does, that's major ammunition Castle can use to get something fixed, by convincing the Powers that Sign His Paychecks that it should be a priority. However, if his datamining turns up empty, he's powerless to do very much, given all the other things on his plate to do.
Does that mean all the logic and math on the forums is totally wasted? No, but it means that we the players have to be smarter in what we look at. If Castle says datamining shows Ice melee doesn't underperform, then there's two possibilities. We could all be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time. Or: the problems Ice Melee has are subtle, and don't turn up in Castle's datamining.
That isn't a call to suggest, as many people do, that Cryptic's datamining is wrong: it probably isn't *wrong* it just might not be looking at the problem in the right way. Someone suggested in this thread that a possible reason for datamining showing that Ice Melee tankers underperform less than expected is because many Ice Melee players don't even take all the Ice Melee attacks, supplanting them with power pool attacks (aka air superiority, boxing). Well, that sort of theorycraft is potentially useful, if directed. That's something Castle theoretically could check, and if his datamining shows that the more Ice melee powers an /Ice tanker takes, the worse his performance becomes, that might be something he can use to get time allocated to look at Ice Melee. That's assuming someone says that in a clear way that doesn't get buried in a hundred other "Cryptic's datamining sucks" posts, and Castle even sees it at all.
The important thing is that theorycraft cannot "prove" a set underperforms, it can only prove that a set's theoretical best performance underperforms everyone elses' best theoretical performance. Cryptic doesn't balance based on that, but on what their playerbase, munchkins and idiots combined, do on average. Right or wrong, we have to work around that fact. So calculations are not the best weapon for getting the devs to allocate time to work on a problem.
It *is* potentially useful to help guide *us* to figure out why the devs' datamining might disagree with us, if we're open-minded enough to look. And its also helpful to guide recommendations for *what* to do, if you can get the devs to act. So its not totally worthless. Just not especially useful as a way to get them to move immediately on a problem we think deserves it.
Recognizing that effecting change is a two-part process (at least): convincing the devs to look in the right place and see for themselves there is a performance problem that datamining can demonstrate (assuming we're right: again, we aren't always: players are weird), and *then* convincing the devs to make the sort of changes we think are in the best interests of the set, *after* they've decided to make a change at all, is the most important thing to understand when advocating for change - at least when doing so seriously, as opposed to simply casually.
Of course, I'm not speaking for Castle or any other red name when I say this. Its just based on my own experience as one of the longer-lived dev-hounders. As Castle said, Tundara has nothing to be sorry for: CoH is currently developed on longer time scales than many people can outlast, and advocacy has a tendancy to burn out the best of us (I speak from experience there). But change advocacy is a long-term thing: very rarely does anything happen on timescales less than months or years, and there is a very long queue of things to be done that any change we want has to fight to squeeze into. You need to be able to pace yourself, or you will in fact burn out completely.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Goes against everything I've seen in the game. I've seen /Stone tankers out control me, and most every other tanker secondary can out-damage me. Based on my experiences in the game, I don't get how the above is true at all. The mathematical experiments we've run in versions of Tundara's thread don't back it up either.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem with most mathematical experiments I see here in the forums is that they are measuring the extremities of performance. The datamining I do shows how players are actually performing in the "reality" of the game. The two are related, but there is often a vast gulf between what a set is capable of and what it is typically asked to do in gameplay.
Edit: Also, the quote you referred to is across all AT/Powerset combinations. */Ice outperforms many other AT/Powerset combinations.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wait, what are the primaries though? If it's mostly fire.ice that I've seen then BURN is the damage and tice mele still stinks on it's own. I have a fire/ice and if it wasn't for burn, I'd probably never kill anything IMO.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ice melee is stupidly overpowered with that ice patch. not a thing should be changed. that's basically control for clearing mobs as is.
[/ QUOTE ]
thanks for actually reading the thread... are you retarded?
[/ QUOTE ]
I like how just because I disagree with you, I'm retarded and a troll.
yes, ice patch makes the set. the massive slows put ice melee on the top for actual tanking, since it lowers incoming damage toward you. it makes for the perfect tanking set. hence it needs no fixing.
Arcana: Personally, I think you put a little too much faith in datamining. Statistics can be skewed far too easily when taken as a whole; granted, it's not nearly as often as we, the players, think. As for whether there's a problem, whether with Stalkers, Tanks, Ice Melee, Energy Aura, Energy Assault, whatever; I suppose it's dependent on their view of what an Archetype is supposed to do. If Archetype/Power Set "x" does "y" sufficiently, it isn't necessarily balanced. If Archetype/Power Set "x" does "y" better than Archetype/Power Set "z", then there's a balance problem, unless Archetype/Power Set "x" does "a" better than Archetype/Power Set "z". The issue is taken to levels of complexities when there are more things to consider than "y" and "a". Suddenly you're having to consider "y", "a", "b", "c", "d", "e", "f", and a huge host of other things. I think a great deal of our frustration with datamining comes from the fact that what we, the players, consider the "ideal 'y'" is not always what the Developers consider it to be. As an example, we cannot know if the slight level of extra control in Ice is "balanced" in their minds. Whether Ice underperforms in value "y", or whether Stone overperforms value "y", we simply cannot know. As a result, we could see a nerf to Stone instead of a buff to Ice. I think the trick is to change their perception of the "ideal 'y'". Because trying to change their perception of "x's" "y" value in relation to "z" isn't going to work.
Is there a problem with Ice Melee? Yes. Is it difficult to prove? Yes. Is that because its values aren't provably worse than, say, Stone Melee's? No. Just casual math thrown about in this thread proves that sufficiently. Is it because of the way Castle must try to convince his superiors? Probably, since Ice's problem isn't easy to quantify through datamining, as, like I said, statistics can be skewed.
To sum this up: I think you're spot on, Arcana.
Edit: No wonder you write these; wall of texts are pretty.
Doom.
Yep.
This is really doom.
[ QUOTE ]
Arcana: Personally, I think you put a little too much faith in datamining.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, I'm on record as saying that 99% of all datamining done on Planet Earth is flawed, and I've never met a dataminer who I would trust to balance my checkbook. I don't trust my own datamining, which is why my own professional datamining is always independently cross-checked. However, it is what it is, and within the parameters of what the devs are looking at, I'm both inclined, and simultaneously forced, to trust that when the devs datamine something, they get the benefit of the doubt that they are right, unless I can prove them wrong, which is a high hurdle, and not especially fair, but also the reality of the situation.
Let me be direct: if Castle says, say, that stalker are not underperforming in PvE based on datamining, you can say he's wrong, but if you were him, would you believe you, or your own research? The fact that you do, in fact, believe your own research over him already suggests what the answer to that question is.
So from his perspective, he has no reason to disbelieve his own datamining research, over the subjective judgements of any particular player. Therefore, the better strategy is to accept the datamining results as canon unless and until they can be challenged or controverted. Even if he did think you were right, his current job is to work on the powersets that score low on the datamining tests. Even if they are flawed, they are all they have until better datamining comes along.
Go around, because you're not going through.
There's a difference between How I Would Do It If I Were In Charge, and How I Would Work With The Devs To Do It Because I'm Not In Charge. Don't confuse the two.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Many /Ice tankers do not feel that they have enough control in their secondary to balance out the lack of damage the set offers. When compared with sets like Stone Melee, SM gets a similar level of control, with higher endurance costs and much higher damage. Ice melee has been relegated to the control 'efficient' set, not necessarily the control set. When you look at the sets for control, you see that a large portion of Ice/'s control comes from Frozen Aura, a power that many feel is unusable because of the nature of the effect.
[/ QUOTE ]
That surprises me. I thought the core control would be Ice Patch.
[/ QUOTE ]
It is the core control of the secondary, but it caps at 5 enemies and does nothing but slow and tick an 8% chance to knockdown every 0.2 seconds. Although the controls come later for /SM, with that set you get a knockdown with a 10 enemy cap and a hella-damage (at least compared to anything /ice) PBAoE hold with a 5 enemy cap and each on short enough timers to keep almost everything knocked or held for the entire fight (barring endurance issues, which is the one thing I think /Ice has going for it since you only need ice patch and burn for 95% of fights).
I've not gotten in on /ice talks in a long time, but the set needs a tune-up.
RagManX
"if the market were religion Fulmens would be Moses and you'd be L. Ron Hubbard. " --Nethergoat to eryq2
The economy is not broken. The players are