ESOC Patch is unbalanced

[gibson]

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

[Darwin_]

I dont think Jerom is right, but I really dont care about proving my point. All I want to say is that I am very satisfied with what the EP has done thus far for the game/community, and I am looking forward to future versions, and want to help in shaping the changes that will happen.

[momuuu]

You could prove your point by saying things that are actually somewhat true for example.

[Goodspeed]

Just have a little faith guys. So far I think we have improved balance significantly with each iteration, but we aren't quite there yet. Balancing 14 civs takes time and it's not easy. Sioux, Iro and Otto will be addressed next update, Port is on our radar and Brit being a top civ has been known to us even if not to the community for a while now. We do have a little bit of a clue of what we're doing. Remember there is literally no one who agrees with every change. Our focus right now is getting a grasp on the state of inter-civ balance, and this should be the focus of any discussion nearing the end of the tournament.

For team games, what would help us is players making more of an effort to coordinate and find creative ways to counter current-meta playstyles. After the event I will make not only the usual 1v1 public balance poll but a team poll as well. Be prepared

I will be eternally grateful of the EP team, and I think my constructive criticism is a way of showing how grateful I am and how invested in our collective enjoyment of the game.

Yes, any feedback is appreciated and yours has been constructive indeed. Don't listen to the people saying you can't have an opinion because you're not high-ranked. A well-formulated opinion with logic and observations to back it up is far more valuable than a high-ranked player's unfounded, barely English rant about this and that being OP.

I just think that many of the changes that have been made thus far have odd consequences, or there was knowledge of those but the team didnt really care or made an weird decision. I would like to see a long beta period for the next EP version like there was for the TR patch.

The EP is in permanent beta, until potentially we have reached a state of balance we can live with. We don't have the manpower to playtest changes in long closed beta periods, so we are making changes and releasing to the public asap. It's comparable to a public beta. If changes turn out bad or a change needs to be added we roll back or add before the start of an event. During the event we make no changes and we start discussing changes for the next version afterwards.

Take the -100f change for french. It was and still is a minor change, but made French far more annoying to play than more balanced IMO. I would have much rather seen lower CDB HP or their cost increased to 125. Almost all of the changes in the patch have made 1v1 balance better, however flawed their approach may seem to me, but have sacrificed team balance. Many changes could have been made to civs that would have increased both 1v1 and team balance: Germany age 3 shipments could have been nerfed or negative multiplier against vills for uhlans instead of -10 hp, Ports could have been given an extra wood crate(s) or just 90f vills instead of 80, and/or a cassador buff.

As I said, nobody agrees with all of the changes but a lot of thought and discussion went into them so even if they seem arbitrary to you, believe me they aren't.
I don't like having to defend specific changes but because you've been constructive I'll make an exception:

Take the -100f change for french. It was and still is a minor change, but made French far more annoying to play than more balanced IMO. I would have much rather seen lower CDB HP or their cost increased to 125.

Both of those changes would have had no effect, and on top of that they are standardizing. If we were to change vill cost to balance French, we would have to go to 130+ which imo is the wrong way to change the civ as the cost-effectiveness of their vills is one of their civ bonuses. Also, we felt all they needed was to be slowed down in discovery age, not necessarily beyond that. -100f was the perfect solution.

Almost all of the changes in the patch have made 1v1 balance better, however flawed their approach may seem to me, but have sacrificed team balance.

The reality of the situation is that team games are very far from balanced right now and are not a priority to us. Having said that, we have made and will continue to make changes to team as long as they don't affect 1v1 too much. The dragoon nerf for example was mostly aimed at team games, where the unit is dominant. By the way I don't agree that almost all of the changes have sacrificed team balance; the vast majority of them had negligible impact on team. The Port change may have been impactful, although the map changes were at least as impactful, but as I explained earlier Ports are a tough civ to balance for both 1v1 and team due to their civ design.
There is also a lack of input from team players, plus there seems to be an unwillingness or inability to find creative counters to standard play. This is understandable because team is a more casual game type, but it makes our job a lot harder.

Germany age 3 shipments could have been nerfed or negative multiplier against vills for uhlans instead of -10 hp

We considered the first one (the second one has no effect) but decided against it because nerfing a civ bonus is a major no-no.

Ports could have been given an extra wood crate(s) or just 90f vills instead of 80, and/or a cassador buff.

We talked about 90f originally, but then the -100f means we are almost nerfing the civ. Without the -100f, we would have sped up their age up too much. An extra wood crate gives Ports an early TP every game, which is something we are not a fan of knowing how strong this is (look at RE Iro). Almost all civs now have the opportunity to go for an early TP if they start with a wood crate (in the case of Otto it's the difference between 1 or 2 TPs), which is a general rule we would like to keep in place. Apart from that I don't mind the change. A cassador buff is possible to add, but not impactful enough to fix Ports on its own. It's a change we discussed and may add in a future patch, though. Thing is we would prefer to fix things with as few changes as possible. Also we don't want to force Port players to FF even more.

I hope you know that your opinion is just that, an opinion. Because our subjectivity is such a significant factor in arguments about specific changes, I think we are all better served trying to get a good grasp on what is strong and what is weak. After all, it doesn't matter what we change if we are nerfing a civ we were supposed to buff, or the other way around.

[zoom]

I like how everyone who doesn't play team is like port is fine but basically every team player who's played team on ep is like port is just way way too strong......

1. Play civilization with worse boom and Dragoons
2. Boom and make Dragoons
3. ??
4. Profit

[doublehelix2569]

I'm not a very strong player with this game, but I do know that I stopped reading after the first couple of pages. I don't know if this was already said so sorry if it was, but the EP should be balanced for 1v1 if that is going to be the primary tournament mode. If you want a patch balanced for 2v2 or 3v3 or something, just make a different patch client for that. I know it is a lot of work, but complaining about patch balance to a team that is working on balancing the game based off of current knowledge and play patterns seems a bit odd. Offer solutions rather than just throwing out problems.

It doesn't help that it's really tough to take into account issues from players that aren't at the top level anyways. Only top-level play can determine what is and isn't a problem on a patch, and because this patch is so young it is very difficult to say what is and isn't a problem. Dutch saw a lot of play at the beginning of the tournament and is seeing less and less as the Autumn Tournament continues. The meta will continue to evolve as the top players play more and more games on the patch and discuss what works. I see nothing wrong with civs having absolutely terrible matchups if they also have really favorable ones. And some civs could be relatively safe but never have guaranteed wins or losses.

It should go without saying, but as more and more civs are added, the harder balance changes are. If we, as a community, were trying to balance vanilla, it'd be a lot easier because the civs are, for the most part, stream-lined and there are fewer civs. Because the native civs and asian civs play quite differently and have special units and abilities on their explorer's and have more than one explorer, the dynamic drastically changes during each age as more and more differences arise.

Long story short, I don't think it is fair to complain about an unbalanced patch when the patch's meta hasn't even become set in stone. Tier lists should always imply the highest level of play and I feel the patches should reflect that. In addition, it is unfair to complain about a patch that is meant to balance 1v1 for having unbalanced 2v2 and 3v3 modes. It'd be like League of Legends patching for Twisted Treeline rather than Summoner's Rift or an FPS with classes balancing toward capture the flag rather than deathmatch (or whatever the primary game mode is).

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

[gibson]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Did I?

[r4go]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Don't take care of him dude. We all know the story

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Don't take care of him dude. We all know the story

We also know you have beaten naturephoenix and starsky! Haha

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Sorry for 2-1 on tourney =/ You're so enjoyful and easy to eliminate . Rekt

[Darwin_]

lol this pissing contest ^^. If you want to prove who is better just play a bo5 or 7 or something lol.

[oxaloacetate]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

forgot japs

[gibson]

Sorry for 2-1 on tourney =/ You're so enjoyful and easy to eliminate . Rekt

Yea because I played seriously the entire tourney. If I actually cared about being good at this game/ trying in the tourney I would have prepared for it/ not trolled/played civs I actually play. You realize the only reason why I played dutch the first game is because dutch is the civ that it automatically selects for me when I open up the game because the HC name is the first alphabetically? 6 months ago when I actually put a modicum of effort into the game I beat you 4 straight times on 4 different 1st lt accounts in qs, I can find them on elo if you want. And every single time I did you messaged me afterwards flaming me/calling me a cheater, ranting about how the only reason why you lost was because bad map etc etc. You're a toxic person and not a good player which is why literally no one in this community likes you. I know I'm not a good player, and I'm okay with that. My self worth isn't based off of my aoe rank which is why I don't scrape and scratch for every little bit of pr I can get and constantly flame people when I lose. I play the game casually because I enjoy it and it generally relaxes me. So congratulations you beat me in the tournament! The very fact that you said that and then put rekt makes me want to pity you, but then I remember what a toxic personality you are and don't care anymore.

[zoom]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Are you talking about Aizamk?

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Sorry for 2-1 on tourney =/ You're so enjoyful and easy to eliminate . Rekt

Yea because I played seriously the entire tourney. If I actually cared about being good at this game/ trying in the tourney I would have prepared for it/ not trolled/played civs I actually play. You realize the only reason why I played dutch the first game is because dutch is the civ that it automatically selects for me when I open up the game because the HC name is the first alphabetically? 6 months ago when I actually put a modicum of effort into the game I beat you 4 straight times on 4 different 1st lt accounts in qs, I can find them on elo if you want. And every single time I did you messaged me afterwards flaming me/calling me a cheater, ranting about how the only reason why you lost was because bad map etc etc. You're a toxic person and not a good player which is why literally no one in this community likes you. I know I'm not a good player, and I'm okay with that. My self worth isn't based off of my aoe rank which is why I don't scrape and scratch for every little bit of pr I can get and constantly flame people when I lose. I play the game casually because I enjoy it and it generally relaxes me. So congratulations you beat me in the tournament! The very fact that you said that and then put rekt makes me want to pity you, but then I remember what a toxic personality you are and don't care anymore.

Damn, some trolls don't like me? Wait, I cry now. Haha. Seriously man, stop caring about this community and make real friends, Jesus. You said I am toxic, what about you? I only said you're not a major, you responded with accusing me of cheating etc. Shmras used to play a lot of Otto, so wasn't him a top player? You can play any civ, if you want to win actually. Your reasoning is dumb seriously. By the way if you look at the civs I play, you will mostly find japs and French, not iro lol. And congrats beating me months ago when I was a low capt actually. I don't even need a bo5 to prove you, that I am better than you and you're bad. Anyway I just pointed out that you are not a major yet, even though you're probably a captain already to me. So you really need to improve a bit to reach that (you're actually not far from that). But ye, you're a touchy guy and thought that was flaming. Well idc, you can even say to be colonel, you can't lie yourself.

[gibson]

Show hidden quotes

You really shouldn't take balance input from master sergeants so seriously...

The fact that I am a lt literally has no effect on my ability to judge the strength of a civ. I am a lt not because of my builds, but because of my inability to make the correct strategic decisions/multitasking. I am very much capable of doing a build correctly and well. It really only takes 5 games to really figure out the differences in dutch from the last version to this. You'll see how their boom is a fair bit faster and smoother, how they can build a 5th bank and sacrifice less age-up time than on 1.2 (or mix a TP without chopping any more wood than 1.2), and how they are comparatively better in age 3 because of their above-average eco and slightly stronger military due to the goon nerf. They are not OP by any means now, and if french and germany had not been nerfed, they would be fine. However they were nerfed, and Dutch is now comparatively quite strong.

If you're a lt you are because of your builds. Seriously. It doesnt take only 5 games to figure out the differences, thats ridiculous. The irony wants us that you also truly don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Ye jerom is absolutely right about this.....I am a horrible mechanical player yet I managed to reach pr 29, beat some pretty good players, and could probably maintain that rank if I cared to just by doing some half decent builds.

Ye pr 29, Nice joke

Yea and I didn't have to constantly lame Iro and otto in qs, oos, and then play almost purely unrated games to sit on that rank

Are you talking about Aizamk?

shhhh

[gibson]

Sorry for 2-1 on tourney =/ You're so enjoyful and easy to eliminate . Rekt

Yea because I played seriously the entire tourney. If I actually cared about being good at this game/ trying in the tourney I would have prepared for it/ not trolled/played civs I actually play. You realize the only reason why I played dutch the first game is because dutch is the civ that it automatically selects for me when I open up the game because the HC name is the first alphabetically? 6 months ago when I actually put a modicum of effort into the game I beat you 4 straight times on 4 different 1st lt accounts in qs, I can find them on elo if you want. And every single time I did you messaged me afterwards flaming me/calling me a cheater, ranting about how the only reason why you lost was because bad map etc etc. You're a toxic person and not a good player which is why literally no one in this community likes you. I know I'm not a good player, and I'm okay with that. My self worth isn't based off of my aoe rank which is why I don't scrape and scratch for every little bit of pr I can get and constantly flame people when I lose. I play the game casually because I enjoy it and it generally relaxes me. So congratulations you beat me in the tournament! The very fact that you said that and then put rekt makes me want to pity you, but then I remember what a toxic personality you are and don't care anymore.

Damn, some trolls don't like me? Wait, I cry now. Haha. Seriously man, stop caring about this community and make real friends, Jesus. You said I am toxic, what about you? I only said you're not a major, you responded with accusing me of cheating etc. Shmras used to play a lot of Otto, so wasn't him a top player? You can play any civ, if you want to win actually. Your reasoning is dumb seriously. By the way if you look at the civs I play, you will mostly find japs and French, not iro lol. And congrats beating me months ago when I was a low capt actually. I don't even need a bo5 to prove you, that I am better than you and you're bad. Anyway I just pointed out that you are not a major yet, even though you're probably a captain already to me. So you really need to improve a bit to reach that (you're actually not far from that). But ye, you're a touchy guy and thought that was flaming. Well idc, you can even say to be colonel, you can't lie yourself.

Thank you for the suggestion. I'll try to make real friends but I don't think I can :(

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Oh and btw I also proposed you to re play the final game of the series and you're still acting as a dick with me, so ungrateful =(

[gibson]

Yes I apologize I'm well known to rage from this game so sometimes I flame people for no reason :(

[DaRkNiTe1698]

Yes I apologize I'm well known to rage from this game so sometimes I flame people for no reason :(

lol

[Hazza54321]

You do realise gimpson plays lying down on the floor with a laptop against a chest of drawers with half his screen covered by skype and discord

[forgrin]

You do realise gimpson plays lying down on the floor with a laptop against a chest of drawers with half his screen covered by skype and discord

I finally dropped by gibby's stream yesterday; I was very confused by the background. Thank you for clearing up that it is indeed a chest of drawers.

[tedere12]

and the camera moves all the time and I guess so does the laptop... lol