Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - Vagabond

#16
The "it's the future, it's space" argument is deeply flawed for one simple reason: We are dealing with people from all eras of humanity. Maybe glitterworld colonists might have a higher chance of deviating than urbworlders who'd be similar to us. But what of Indworlders? During our industrial age, women hadn't even had the right to vote yet, and homes were incredibly nuclear with gender roles still in place. Medieval worlds, well, we can imagine some church involve there. . .Caveworlds, while we can't say for sure what they did back then, we know that only men and women can have children together, and since we are here to talk about this, we know that lgbt inclinations must not have been to much of an issue.

Then again, maybe in Tynan's universe it has always been common and accepted all throughout time.

Anyone else find it amusing when a post start "I am this [. . .] so [. . .]". What I am or am not doesn't matter, I just want the game to be as realistic as possible. Just saying, I want it all in there.

#17
Ideas / Re: Gun minimum skill requirement
July 19, 2016, 01:44:41 PM
My two cents:

Each tile contains a person, if we take from that, that which is the general convention - That such a tile is about 3' - 5' square, then it isn't to far off that any joe shmoe can make the shot. 3*50= 150, while 5*50= 250. 150 feet is 50 yards or 46 meters, while 250 feet is 83 yards, or 76 meters. With a long barrelled rifle, using a high powered scope, a shot at that distance isn't difficult. With a good teacher, you can have someone shooting a snub nose on target at 15 yards on the first day. My dad as I brought my little brother out to shoot for the first time awhile back, using a 20 year old target pistol (.22lr), and by the end of the day he was shooting on target (1:1 scale silhouette target) from 30 yards. To be clear, his groups were non-existent, most of his shots weren't center mass, and he only accidentally made headshots (when he tried for one, he always went over the right shoulder). Still, the important thing is he hit the target.

With a high powered rifle, a hit anywhere is going to be devastating, and even with body armor the impact would be as well.

Now, this doesn't change the fact that RNG is BS sometimes. Nor am I saying the combat simulation doesn't need improvement. Far from it, I believe that:

-Missed shots don't spread around as far.
-Hit chance should be affected by whether or not your target is moving straight towards you, away from you, or some other direction.
-Being out of cover should be very dangerous in a firefight.
-being in full cover in relation to an attacker should make you nigh untouchable barring penetration of that cover or explosion.
-Ammo should be craftable and required for the operation of weapons. In a firefight, there is no bigger "Oh s**t" moment than hearing "click click click" and realizing that was your last magazine. To prevent the convoluted mess that would become of such a system if every caliber of bullet was represented, there would only be 5 types of ammo: Light Ammunition, Ammunition, Heavy Ammunition, Energy Cells, and Explosive Ammunition.
-"Hunker Down": a command that can be issued to conscripted colonist that forces them behind cover and halts their firing (as popping out of cover to shoot should lower your concealment level by a step).
-"Peek": Quickly peek out of cover, shoot at nearest target. Aiming speed bonus, to hit chance lowered.
-"Suppress": Targets enemies in cover and in range, if they try to shoot from cover, or leave it, the suppressing pawn gets to fire instantly at them. Always popped out of cover, waiting to shoot.
-Shot difficulty, four buttons used to determine when the pawn will shoot. "sure shot" 75%-100%, Good Shot 50-74, poor shot 25-49, itchy trigger 0-24. Useful because even missed shots can hit something, but sometimes you want to control ammo use.

Things like this would make it better, imo.
#18
Agree with OP. Don't be discouraged. A lot of the same people against this were against all sorts of stuff that has been implemented. Buncha negative Nancy-types that I've always thought enjoy the game as a arcade-like base builder with the ultimate goal of creating some grotesque "kill box" to deal with massively unrealistic amounts of enemies.

I'm glad the steam release has brought more people who see this as a colony sim. More voices requesting these features can do nothing but good things for this game.

The main issue I see, that works against pretty much every feature being added to the game is the timescale. Once the timescale is hammered out, we can properly simulate the things that are important to a colony simulator. One of those important things, (imo) is water. People need to drink. Later technology levels expect to defecate and urinate in a flushable toilet. All of these add extra layers to the simulation, to the way we play the game. They also provide opportunities, such as those presented, for non-combat events. I love the combat system, and enjoy combat, but it is a crutch. With a fully realized simulation of human behavior, needs, construction, research, ect, the game wouldn't have to rely on combat as the only means of challenging for player and pawns.

borsuk argued that conduits are more important and devastating than water would be, for various reasons. But what could be more important that potable water? That would be way more devastating than losing power. without water you dehydrate. Without water you can't water your crops. Without water people can't clean themselves, which is a health risk. As is having feces and urine floating around.

Power isn't even necessary, or at least shouldn't be. We should be able to fully survive and thrive without it, if the other technology levels were expanded upon.

I'd rank Water right up there with power, temperature, food, and combat as core features. All these things are important and needed to enhance the simulation and deepen the strategy of colony building.
#19
Quote
Its a better simulation because my idea actually logs every pawns sexuality, and they get a separate roll on it to see whether or not they are gay. The current system is a little stupid, Gay has to compete with every other trait, making it both rare, and undesirable. Simply put, I'd rather have Sanguine than gay, and gay already is in a sea of traits, so getting it in the first place is just hard.

I feel to better represent reality, as a simulation, you see, that the system should be moved entirely to the new social system, and that every pawn makes a secondary sexuality role alongside their already present traits. Everyone has a sexuality, and LGBT is a bit more common than portrayed

Would it not be better, to represent reality, as a simulation, that it compete with the other traits rather than there be a one in four chance? Unless you are for stacking the percentage to still make it rare?

Just looking at wikipedia's article on it, that takes in to account the world population as well as a break down of individual countries, most places are sitting at 1-7%. The average population per state in the USA is 3.8%. For the sake of argument, we could just knuckle down and accept a 10% as the world population being LGBT (which according to the data, is more than fair). So characters could have a 90% chance to be "straight", and you could split the 10% up between the L, G, B, and T. I think you'd have more LGBT's with the current system. . .

I made this suggestion in the past, regarding expanding the trait system. I wouldn't be opposed to having a sexuality category for traits, that allows people to unify or fray based on sexual orientation along with the rest of the the web. https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=17605.msg191901#msg191901
#20
Ideas / Re: Arcade vibe - the FTL theory - Opinion
July 17, 2016, 01:20:30 PM
Restraint is the key here, I think. The cool thing is, it isn't cheating because it is part of the base game. You may feel like you're cheating because you can start with practically everything to get a colony up and going, but it still isn't. It is up to your to restrain yourself from doing so, if you want to start from scratch and have a more difficult early game.

Unless you start with a crap ton of colonists, good luck hauling all that stuff before it deteriorates.

I agree with what others have said about arbitrary barriers. At the same time though, I think an actual campaign might be neat later on, when the game is fully fleshed out. A full on story, cutscenes and all that teach you the game. Starting with tribal pawns, working up to a copper/bronze age civilization then "migrating" to a different part of the map. Then medieval, then industrial, then modern... Finally leaving the planet in a spaceship. It'd have objectives and such that you must complete as time goes on "Have x amount of farms and harvest X amount of produce", "make a religious building of marble", ect.

It would allow for a "real" tutorial. Idk. Not on my feature wishlist for the time being.
#21
Ideas / Re: [A14] My thoughts.
July 17, 2016, 01:05:16 PM
Quote from: b0rsuk on July 17, 2016, 05:33:03 AM
Rimworld already seems to be heading in that direction, all recent alphas made the tech tree longer, if only by making base things require research and bumping the numbers. But I think your proposal goes too far into Civilization direction.

Aren't you happy with the Lost Tribe scenario ?

There are continuity errors, I think. It is fun starting out as them, but there isn't enough content to promote play as a tribal people. You should be able to play a tribe and not only survive but thrive within that technology level, and once you acquire a sufficient amount of higher tech people, you should be able to begin advancing technology levels. That is what I think, anyways.
#22
Quote from: DariusWolfe on July 17, 2016, 12:41:53 AM
Heterosexuality is normal for you. Homosexuality is normal for others, and bisexuality is normal for still others. Your normal shouldn't be imposed on others.

Also, one doesn't "become" bisexual or straight or gay. One might go into a same-sex relationship, or opposite-sex relationship, but that doesn't change their sexuality.

I agree that sexuality should be separated from the trait system. Every person has a sexuality that's their own, even if heterosexuality is more common than others. You shouldn't be gay OR some other personality trait.

There is a reason why I consider it normal, and it isn't just based on my own personal habits, which I haven't discussed because it isn't anyone's business and not something I believe should be broadcasted onto the internet.

Deviancy. Homosexuality, Bisexuality, pedophilia, necrophilia, cannibalism, ect. There is a reason why they are considered deviant - they stray from the norm of society. Admittedly, at different times and/or places, some deviant behaviors were considered normal or acceptable. Personally, I believe in the "to each their own", so if someone has permission to eat a corpse, they should be able to. Or if they have permission to have sex with that corpse, sure. Or permission to do both. However, even with permission and the law on their side, it'd still be deviant behavior. Most people don't have sex with, or eat corpses.

If you wish to dress up as a baby and be spanked for breastfed, dress up like a horse and have a woman lead you around a corral, if you wish to have six wives who may or may not be all sisters, I believe you should be allowed to do so. It would STILL be deviant behavior, but to reiterate, I'm all for people being able to explore their deviancy.
#23
Personally, I see being heterosexual as being normal. It makes sense that being homosexual or bisexual as a trait, to me at least. For homosexuality at least, being such would be incredibly detrimental to the continuance of a fledgling colony, as those individuals aren't contributing to the gene pool through reproduction. A trait is something that distinguishes them from the masses, the masses are general heterosexual, so having homosexuality as a trait makes sense.

One of my most prized fighters has gay as a trait, but had he not rolled with such good combat stats i'd have let him die rather than rescue him. Gay people can still be useful in game, but they are still gay, and it is an identifying trait that distinguishes them. It is certainly a flaw on a backwater planet where people are trying to build a colony in a place that would rather see them destroyed.

I have two friends, in real life, named marcus (though one's is spelled markus). When one of our friends goes "anyone seen marcus" we say "Marcus or gay markus?". When I think of Marcus, the first three things I think is fat, guitarist, and crybaby. When I think of Markus, I think tall, gay, and strong.
#24
Ideas / [A14] My thoughts.
July 16, 2016, 11:43:21 PM
Two things.

1) EdBs mods seem to have been mostly integrated, save the pawn editor from "prepare carefully". I think this should be put in game and integrated into the scenario-new game set up. Would make the start of the game more interesting.

2) More tech levels, with each tech level being able to afford appropriate healthcare, weapons/armor/equipment, survival, and happiness.

Humans are incredibly adaptable at all levels of technology throughout human history. Being able to thrive nearly anywhere, with whatever their level of development affords.

More than ever, I believe my suggestion for multiple requirements to a particular technology is needed.

Starting tech level is decided by the scenario, but it isn't just some arbitrary limitation. It simply dictates what kind of backgrounds you have available during pawn creation. It is the pawns, and their backgrounds that determines technology level. What this means, is that if you start out with primitive characters due to a scenario, then you must start from the very bottom of the tech tree.  If you start as with glitterworld pawns, then you start with all previous research researched, but must research glitterworld tech.

Each technology corresponds to a particular tech level, and has skill level requirements. Every tech "recipe" requires:

-Research of X
-Construction or craft of X
-other skill of X

So hydroponics would require research of X, construction of X, and farming of X. While something like mining lasers would require research of x, craft of x, and mining of x. The three colonist involved in unlocking and researching the tech would all have to be of the same or higher technology level of the technology itself. So in the case of hydroponics everyone would have to be at least of Indworld tech level or higher (ie, an indworld farmer, urbworld builder, and glitterworld researcher).

My reasoning behind this is that you need someone to have the idea (the farmer for hydroponics), someone who is capable of understanding the idea and devising a strategy to implement it (the glitterworld researcher for hydroponics), and someone capable of actually building or crafting the object or device from the researcher notes/blueprint/ect. (the urbworld builder for hydroponics).

This makes it sufficiently difficult to advance in technology level while not making it to easy, or just having an arbitrary limitation of advancement.

EDIT: To clarify- when one starts out a low technology level, and acquire pawns from a higher tech level, they don't automatically advance as if they started at that tech level. They must work all the way through the tech tree and the technology levels in order to advanced as opposed to starting as a higher technology level and already having everything before it already known and working up from there.
#25
Ideas / Re: "Gay" as a trait
May 18, 2016, 01:41:46 PM
Quote from: SpaceDorf on May 16, 2016, 05:29:15 PM
(. . .)

The political discussion about what cultures like and what personal beliefs are is nice.
But it is a fact of human nature ( and other mammals ) that these gender preferences exist.

And a game, that is mainly about storytelling and human experience it would be wrong in my eyes to let those potential stories go. In my eyes the only true barriers are consent and age. If those are given everything goes.

And since someone mentioned the Ancient Greek already, there are some sexual preferences I would really not like to see in any game. But they are also allready covered by consent and age :)

(. . .)

Consent and age vary with the century and culture as well, though. Look at the quinceanera - it was the celebration from a girl to a woman. My grandmother who was Nahua migrated from from Oaxaca to Coahuila where my great grandfather earned his degree in engineering. My grandfather's family was from Coahuila, but he was born a United States citizen in Texas (my great grandmother and father earned their citizenship prior to his birth). Anyways, his family and her family arranged them to meet after my grandfather finished boot camp (U.S Navy) and it was "love at first sight". He was 18 and she was 15. According to them, it was a chaste marriage as both of them were Catholic and it was a stipulation of the church due to her age and not physically capable of child birth yet due to her being petite.

Basically, what I am getting at is that while in america or whatever country you live in it may be wrong, it is only wrong because society says it is. Society is far from always being right. We have cavemen in this game, it would make sense that as soon as a girl has had her first menstrual, she would be considered a woman and would likely be transferred from her parent's possession to a suitable man, assuming we are talking homo sapiens sapiens and not one of the other homo species.

I prefer it all to be in and accounted for, rather than cherry picking for the sake of political correctness. A century ago going public with homosexuality was ill advised, while arranged marriage was still common. Heck, prior to the 1920s age of consent was 7-14 depending on the state. Wasn't until 2001 that hawaii changed theirs from 14 to 16.

I don't know about you all, but I grew up in south east San Diego, in California. I remember middle and highschool, as well as how much tail I chased and baked. My wife and I had our first child at 16 and 17 respectively. That was an accident, one that could have happened with a plethora of girls from the sixth grade until I got with my wife - then girlfriend. Mind you, she was 115 pounds soaking wet, a size zero, and five foot three inches tall. Zero complications during pregnancy or birth, with her being in labor for a measly five hours, and active labor for about an hour after that (where the doctors are actually instructing her to evacuate the alien-like creature).

If we are going to have one form of deviancy in game, why not have them all? Just like in real life, why does the LGBT have the monopoly on social freedom, if that form of deviancy is to be allowed, we should also allow polygamy. I'm all about equality, as long as it is equal across the board and those of the previously oppressed don't overreach as some "equal rights groups" do.
#26
Ideas / Re: "Gay" as a trait
May 16, 2016, 10:08:43 AM
Quote from: caekdaemon on May 16, 2016, 09:54:20 AM
I'm not much of a modder or anything, so I'm not sure how hard this would be to implement, but what about moving the sexuality and social traits to a subcategory of the social tab?

(...)

As for the existing trait system, just relabel it as physical and mental traits or something along those lines, and rip out any social traits (like, say, Abrasive) and put them under personality traits instead, which should tidy things up.

Suggested something similar a long time ago, it never got much response, aside from it eventually becoming sort-of a thing in game.

https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=17605.0
#27
Ideas / Fog of War & Line of Sight
May 16, 2016, 10:03:40 AM
Hello,

I would like to put forward (again) that we need Fog of War and Line of Sight mechanics. Player controlled characters and npcs should both be equally affected by this system. I believe that this will benefit the game as it will provide a real challenge to gameplay and allowing us to move past the arbitrary system of artificial challenge increase via ever increasing amounts of hostile npcs.

The map will start blacked out and be discovered by pawns as their line of sight passes over it. When they aren't actively looking in a direction it is still visible to the player, but you can't see any activity going on in the area - it being "greyed" out. Terrain features and buildings can still be seen, but entities can't, and any changes to terrain or structures since your pawns last looked at it won't register until they do.

Ideally line of sight will pretty much extend a certain distance based on degree. Best explained with a picture:



Red extends the farthest. Green extends less, and blue extends way less. The reason for this is what I would call "Useful vision" - what you can actually process, react to, ect. Just go outside and look at some point in the horizon - you can USEFULLY see everything in red pretty much as far out as you can see before obstructed by something. You can USEFULLY see everything in green to a distance of about 10 meters. You can USEFULLY see everything in blue to a distance of about two or or three meters. So assuming we consider a tile a meter, a pawn on a tile can see two/three tiles where the blue would be, 10 where the green would be, and as far out until obstructed with the red. Again, for gameplay purposes this would be sufficient to simulate what we can do in real life, as in real life that is about those are about the distances you can actually make use of what you see.

The perks of such a system should be quite apparent. It would make simple things like finding materials actually something more than just scanning around the map in pause. It would make hunting actually hunting instead of magically knowing where the herds are. Bandits would have to search you out, and you wouldn't know when or where they landed - we wouldn't have to have as many enemies flooding the map. The bandits could actually do stuff without us knowing, which would provide all sorts of opportunities for them to eff us over - setting crops on fire, sapping our walls, blowing up solar panels or wind turbines, sneaking into our storage and stealing stuff.

We could have interesting characters come into our colonies. Consider a wanderer who asks to join our colony and after a time we suddenly lose his vision cone and he no longer shows up on any of our info tabs. Then your colonists start coming up missing. The guy is a psychopath and now he's murdering your colonists. In this system, there would be flanking bonuses, there could be executions if you can manage to sneak up on someone and put a bullet in their back of their head or a knife in their back.

Injuries to the eyes would mean more than just loss of accuracy. A colonist who just lost an eye also just lost part of his vision cone.

Watch towers could have a bill that allows citizens with certain weapons to go and keep a look out. Scoped weapons and binoculars could extend vision.

Cameras could be a thing, so when you have a pawn monitoring them remotely you will have vision in those locations. Prison Architect has a lot of really good, fleshed out systems that could be utilized in Rimworld to give REAL challenge, not the arbitrary difficulty curve we have now.

Cheers,
Michael
#28
Ideas / Re: "Gay" as a trait
May 16, 2016, 09:09:12 AM
Simple solution to sexual deviants within your colony: run them naked and weaponless into a fight they can't win. You can pretend your colonists are making them "walk the plank"; put them all into combat mode and have them stand there with weapons "forcing" the person out into the wild.

Right now, with children not yet being part of the game, I don't really have an issue with having a couple of people hanging around tribbin' or frottin'. As a long time proponent of the Rimworld as a Colony Sim, versus Rimworld as a super unrealistic escape sim, I have to say that such behavior will not be acceptable when I can finally play the game as such. Reproduction would be to important to have people around who object to it.

In regards to the vat children comment: Most vat people, as least according to flavor text, are troubled individuals who if not socially retarded, are plagued by other problems due to their artificial birth and "programming" - so I doubt it is a thing when you want to increase the population of "normal" people.

As for removing "gay" as a trait. . . I'm down with that. Though there needs to be a clear way to see what a character's gender is, and what their sexual preference is. I.e If I have a man who identifies as a woman, it needs to say he's a male - not what he identifies as. Then it needs to say whether he likes men, women, both, or women who identify as men, or men who identify as women, or men who were born women, or women who were born men, or a person born with both sexual organs and which one he likes to be the working one, ect.

Cheers,
Michael
#29
Ideas / Re: Idea how rimkids would work.
April 19, 2016, 08:22:45 PM
Old old post I made. The main gripe people had with it was my proposed "abstract" timescale. However, it is getting more and more apparent that we are already using abstract timescales - a counter argument I never thought to make before. Timescales have always been far to short to belong to a planet that is life-sustaining. The only difference between my proposed timescale and the one the game uses, is that the game tries to hide that is abstract, while mine admits it.

Another idea I was tossing around timescale-wise was a random number of days passing at the end of each day. The idea came while I was watching TV and realized that TV shows, like ones with actual continuous plots, don't worry about playing out the events of each and every moment. Instead of an AI storyteller, they have a screenplay writer who strives to keep things interesting. In good shows you can tell how much time has passed, roughly - sometimes exactly. What does this mean? At the end of the day 1-X amount of days pass, an unobtrusive center screen message pops up showing the date and days passed and fades. Special days (birthdays, anniversaries, memorial days for important events/battles) automatically get selected if the game RNG'd past it. Haven't hammered it all out yet - but there is an alternative to the proposed one below.

This suggestion was from before we had work schedules, or families, ect.

Reproduction is something I've felt could enrich the game considerably. Vat growing children is certainly an option, however I'd like to point out another option that could work concurrently.

##Time and Aging##

Time: Each day could abstractly represent three months, given real life times on construction and production. The length of a day might need adjusting. A 24 hour clock could have somewhere around 30 seconds to a minute being the length of a game hour. Leasure time would fit in here, basically the way it worked in diggles was when you clicked on a dwarf it had a little clock in the corner with two moveable hands. The hands would be manipulated to decide what hour they start work and what hour they end work. During the time they were off the clock, they would build relationships, eat, sleep, and do little fun things.

Aging: Basically there would be eight age categories, each with interesting aspects. The base time is the standard length of time they are in that age group, the extra day is a "late development" factor. For example: Crawlers have a base time of one day. So they will always be in that stage for at least one day. After that day, the game will "roll" with a 25% chance at a second day. If they get that second day, the third day will be rolled with a 15% chance of them getting it; alternatively it could simply be an RNG, where it will just pick a number from one to three.

Aging could look like this:

Infant
-Infants are unable to do anything; they simply stay swaddled on their mother, which precludes the mother from certain activities.
-Base time, two days. One extra day possible at: 25% chance (Alternative: RNG, 1-2)

Crawler
-Crawlers do nothing but get under other colonist's feet.  X% chance of a dwarf tripping over a crawler when passing.
-Base time, one day. Two extra days possible at: 25/15% chances. (Alternative: RNG, 1-3)

Walker
-Walkers tend to wander off from the home-zone, possibly endangering themselves.
-25% chance to do a light hauling task.
-Base time, five days. Four extra days possible at: 25/20/15/10% chances. (Alternative: RNG 5-9)

Talker
-Talkers talk. A lot. X% chance to distract another Colonist from their task.
-50% chance to do a light hauling task.
-Base time, twelve days. Four extra days possible at: 25/20/15/10% chances. (Alternative: RNG, 12-16)

Helper
-Helpers try to emulate the adults. They can do simple tasks like fetching pails of water.
-Can do a light hauling task, and 25% chance to do a medium hauling task.
-Base time, twenty days. Eight extra days possible at: 50/45/40/35/30/25/20/15% chances. (Alternative: RNG, 20-28)

Worker
-Workers start really helping the colony.
-Can do light/medium hauling tasks, and 50% chance to do a heavy hauling task.
-Leave their parent's home.
-Base time, twenty days. Twelve extra day possible at: 75/70/65/60/55/50/45/40/35/30/25/20% Chances. (Alternative: RNG, 20-32)

Breeder
-Able to marry; Each colonist requires a piece of jewelry. There must be an available Private Quarters with a double bed.
-Married Breeders can have children. Pregnancy lasts 3 days.
-Can do light/medium/heavy hauling tasks.
-Become Elders at two hundred days old.

Elder
-No longer work themselves, but instead "Mentor" other colonists, it increases that colonists skill gain and increases production speed. It is much more effective than the "Aid" feature, which allows two colonists to work on a single task to help a less skilled person benefit from a more skilled worker.
-Has a 75%/50%/25% chance to do a light/medium/heavy hauling task.
-After they are 240 days old, they have an acumulative 5% chance per day to pass away.
#30
Ideas / Re: Can we celebrate birthdates?
March 01, 2016, 08:42:13 AM
Quote from: Z0MBIE2 on February 29, 2016, 05:33:14 PM
You said the issue is that our planet wouldn't even of been able to support human plant or life, and I listed other reasons... Like would they even know the current date, they'd have different year lengths and month lengths then the planets they were born on, or y'know if born in space.

Hm. I hadn't thought of that. Even if the timescale was fixed to bring the planet into the goldilocks zone, that is still a pretty wide belt around the sun. Planets at different distances from the sun, even within the goldilocks zone would have slightly different times. Also a very interesting point about those who are born in space - what measure of time do they use.

All valid points that would most certainly make this suggestion unfeasible. However, I still think timescale needs to be fixed for other reasons... This is just no longer a viable reason to do it. GG Zombie, I concede on this ^.^