Warhammer - Xbox 360 + Squigs + Video Interview

[HRose]

Again, I think you are reading too much into some of the details, the packages could just be the ability to use a 2-handed sword or a bow.  The ability to choose a mount "package" earlier than normal just because you like exploring is nice.

It doesn't change what I wrote. Even in DAoC you can allocate your points in one spec line only and get those skills earlier, or distribute the points on different spec lines and get the higher level skills later.

There aren't concrete differences.

Plus the packages, tactics and morale are three different system. If you can respec tactics this doesn't has any effect on the packages, and it's the package system that may suffer from locking people into templates.

[Lantyssa]

Both suck because you need to have pre-planned your character if you don't want to finish with it being gimped because you wasted points on packages that aren't good.

It never says there is a limit to how many packages you can get.  Specifically it says, "they offer players the ability to wind up with all of the stuff they want eventually".

That sounds like you cannot gimp yourself because if you keep playing you will be able to get everything available to your class.  The skill slots are what will limit you in combat.

[HaemishM]

It sounds to me like it's a bit more like Guild Wars, in that you pick a specific set for a battle, but will be able to switch out skillsets and packages for the next battle.

But Hrose, you are ignoring the biggest thing about this. No levels means (or should mean) very little to no power differentials. No level 50 that turns the tide of battle because all the others are level 40. Segmenting zones by tiers should also help that a bit. In other words, it sounds good.

Hrose is just pissed because Mark Jacobs closed the blinds.

[HRose]

It sounds to me like it's a bit more like Guild Wars, in that you pick a specific set for a battle, but will be able to switch out skillsets and packages for the next battle.

That's the "tactics" system that you can switch from battle to battle. The packages are instead the basic advancement system.

Here the point is about what I and others wrote. Or the packages impose a choice as in my hopefully wrong guess, or they will get eventually flattened as you reach the last rank as others said.

In this second case it would be like a skill system where you can eventually max out all the skills available (where the skills are restricted by class, though).

We also still have to see if what was revealed before is still true, because I knew that each of the four "tiers" should allow you to specialize your class like in a branching system (so determining preset packages you have available).

But Hrose, you are ignoring the biggest thing about this. No levels means (or should mean) very little to no power differentials.

I'm not ignoring it just because you are convinced I am. On my site I wrote:

Considering everything together the "no level" claim is pretty weak. It's possible that gaining ranks doesn't scale up your stats, hitpoints and mana (at this point it would be the only real difference), but add a rank-based itemization and you basically have the exact same mechanic that drives DAoC or every other level-based game.

Explaning better, it sounds like you'll gain a "rank" every "x" skills you unblock in a package. The stuff available in these packages seem to not be only in the form of skills you actively use, but even bonuses to stats and all the rest. Just more manipulable since the players have a more direct choice in what they pick.

But from every point of view you observe this, there's still a "level up" mechanic that lets you pick +5 to Strength or more constitution, or bonuses to attacks and so on.

What's this if not "power differentials"?

The raw mechanic here doesn't do anything to flatten it. Which is what I described:

In DAoC: level up -> allocate
In Warhammer: allocate -> level up

Allocating not only the skills, like in DAoC, but even the bonuses to the stats and all the rest. I just don't see a concrete difference in the mechanic used at the base.

Segmenting zones by tiers should also help that a bit. In other words, it sounds good.

This is my guess (level capping the zones in four tiers), I still have to read Mythic confirming this. The doubt is whether the gap of 10 ranks isn't already quite significant in the power differential or not.

Which is also what I wrote the past Sunday elsewhere:

Here the game mechanics are extremely important because if they divide the zones accessibility in four (as the four tiers of ten ranks, for a total of forty levels) the PvP could become just a matter of who's closer to the zone level cap. It's important here that each new rank isn't a huge leap over the other

Definitely not something I was ignoring. Just not repeated here because I consider it implicit.

Hrose is just pissed because Mark Jacobs closed the blinds.

At all. In fact I think there are some good ideas and I didn't expected the overall design to have them.

But it doesn't mean that there aren't flaws if you look in detail.

[HRose]

Btw, short version:

You say that Warhammer design is good because the power differentail between the ranks is small.

I say that I agree that the fact that the power differential being small would make the design of the game "good".

But at the same time there is no evidence from the descriptions of the mechanics we have that the power differential is, in fact, small.

That's all.

[Johny Cee]

@ Hrose:

I respect that you put alot of thought and effort into writing about MMO's.  Something about your style of writing makes me want to write froth-mouthed obscenities in size 18 font,  though.

The packages of skills/abilities sounds more like RA's from DAoC then it does the old spec paths.  Or some of the CoH abilities.  We don't have enought information to properly judge which direction the system is going.  Playing down the actual level numbers (lf lvl 39+ druid for CM pit group, PST!) is probably a good sign that level is going to be less important.

The most postive thing?  Mythic learned their lesson about support classes and hybrids.  The massive amounts of min/maxing of class/spec options in DAoC sunk in.

Basically, in DAoC, to RvR you want to put together a min/maxed group by classes and specs.  Instead of rewarding variety of play or flexibility,  the system rewarded massive specialization.  If you were a cleric or druid,  groups would YELL at you if you were nuking or doting a target.  Your group wanted you healing,  or at least pre-kiting and moving around. 

Hybrids sucked.  Being 2/3rds a dps class and 2/3rd a caster/support generally meant a group was better off replacing you with a 100% dps or 100% support/utility class.

The min/maxing of group roles also lead to certain classes having guaranteed slots,  (primary CCer,  two healers, speed 5 class, end regen, 3-4 dps) while other classes sat at the portal keep spamming for a group invite. 

NO STEALTH.  Yeeehaw!  Without opening a huge can of worms,  stealth is a fucking bear to balance with PvP/RvR in mind.  Either you have ineffective stealth classes that can't even group,  or you have one on one or one on two gods.  The old archetype of the high alpha strike stealth class should be fucking discarded for PvP games.

I'd be interested in hearing about if the /assist command is going to make it into War.  I certainly hope not.

[HRose]

The packages of skills/abilities sounds more like RA's from DAoC then it does the old spec paths.

Not really since you cannot max out RAs, nor the average player will even remotely go near that.

Which is the only thing that differentiates RAs from other level-based mechanics: the diminished returns.

Hybrids sucked.  Being 2/3rds a dps class and 2/3rd a caster/support generally meant a group was better off replacing you with a 100% dps or 100% support/utility class.

NO STEALTH.  Yeeehaw!

Yep, I agree on that.

[Margalis]

I've said it before and will say it again - super-specialized classes only work when you can exert a lot of control over a battle.

Having a glass cannon is fine as long as you can ensure it won't be hit. If it gets hit as often as anyone else it stops making any sense.

In basically all of like having each part be really specialized works well until something out of the ordinary happens. In a company that has a 5 stage assembly line process you have people who each know their 1 stage. Which works great unless everyone at stage 3 dies in a bus accident, then you're fucked.

The problem is that in MMORPGs things almost always go according to plan. And hence specialization is nearly always better. If there is a reasonable chance your mages are going to get hit having them possess a bit less raw power for more survivability looks pretty good.

[Arthur_Parker]

Warhammer Alliance has posted a Joshua Drescher Q&A from SomethingAwful. 

I posted quite a bit of this yesterday, I had edited it as I didn't want whoever it was to get in trouble (if it was off the record).

Here's a copy paste of it from Warhammeralliance if you want to read it all.

Warhammer Online Associate Producer Joshua Drescher popped by the SomethingAweful forums and provided a bit more insight into the details surrounding E3 2006. Many of the details have previously been highlighted in a few of the previews but there's a few rough areas that are cleared up in this brief Q&A. Here is the cleaned up and edited for readabilty version.

So can you touch on character advancement at all?

No levels. Four tiers, with ranks within each tier. You'll have 4 XP bars that allow you to select "packages" of advancements - abilities, static buffs, skills, etc. that you want to work on. Three will be "standard" bars, one will be RvR-specific.

The packages allow you to select advancements that interest you without level-locking them. So, if you're a big fan of exploring and you want to get a mount earlier than - say - an improved combat ability, you can choose a package that includes the ability to use a mount. Packages will have SOME restrictions - most likely tier-specific - but they offer players the ability to wind up with all of the stuff they want eventually, but also the ability to get it in the order of their choosing.

As I understand it, there are 4 classes per realm which seems fairly limited; although I saw a Goblin Battler in one of those videos so I'm a bit confused since I thought that was an Orc class only.

Well, one of the things that's causing the "limited" classes is the requirement that every class be combat-effective and serve an immediately recognizable role. We have no pure "support" classes. In addition, we don't have rogues or stealth classes. We're not fond of hybrid classes either, though there will almost certainly be SOME degree of hybridization for some races.

Regarding the Battler, don't rely too heavily on the models you saw in the demos in terms of what to expect from the final design. They were chosen mostly for aesthetic reasons and aren't intended to represent exactly what you'll see when we launch (or even when we go into beta later this year). The class-limiting for Greenskins is mostly designed to allow us to use both Orcs and Gobbos without having ridiculous stuff like a goblin Warboss running around as a powerful melee character.

Four careers seems a bit low and I'm afraid there will be too much overlap, or are those classes just base arch types like we saw EQ2? Basically, in what ways can a player build his character to differentiate from the next person?

In short, we're looking for Gauntlet-style, iconic classes. To use the Gauntlet classes, a warrior beats the snot out of you, a Valkyrie sucks up damage all day long, a wizard blasts the crap out of you and an elf runs around really quickly, pinging you with arrows. You know exactly what you're in for simply by looking at your opponent.

Regarding differentiation, there are a number of things to consider:


1) In terms of simple aesthetics, customization will play a large role. Armor dying and trophies, primarily, will allow players to be visually unique without breaking the aforementioned "iconic look, iconic role" rule. When I say trophies, I mean things like orcs wearing belts of dwarf beards and the skulls of fallen opponents impaled on the spikes of their armor.

2) In terms of personal advancement, we have the package system. I explained this earlier, but it basically lets you play the class you want to play and advance in exactly the way that appeals to you, in exactly the order you want to do it.

3) And in terms of combat, we have tactics. This system is a strategic layer of combat where players choose from a pool of available "tactics" before combat that they are then locked into for a set period of time (minutes or hours, not days). Tactics can be things like persistant buffs, race or mob-specific attack bonuses, etc. As players advance, additional slots open up allowing players to use more - or more powerful tactics. Weak tactics are worth one point, the most powerful tactics are worth - say - five. So if you have ten slots open, you might choose ten minor tactics or two extremely powerful tactics or a mix of five of the former, one of the latter. Or any other mix in between.


This is designed to help players avoid being locked into a specific character spec in any significant way without giving them the ability to respec on the fly without any advanced thought. And, of course, to avoid the typical "I hit these three buttons and - SOMETIMES - this button over here too" style of play.

Also will character creation be just choose gender, choose class, choose head, and thats it? Or do we get more?

Still in discussion on that one. Your character's appearance WILL change over time, though. Orcs will get larger and more muscular, dwarf beards will grow longer, etc.

Will each faction have the same 4 classes? Fighter, shooter, healer magic, offensive magic? Or will it vary from faction to faction?

Absolutely not. We are 100% married to the IP when it comes to stuff like this. Dwarfs and magic don't mix, so the closest you'll get to a magic class will be a priest carving runes into things. And I can't say this enough - EVERY class will be a combat class. Nobody will be running around, healing all day long and trying to stay out of the fray.

What I want to know, is that how do you plan on balancing parties in PvP?

Current plan: Don't get much sleep at night, lie awake fixated on making it all work.

Seriously, though, RvR combat will come in three flavors:

Skirmish RvR - players stumbling across enemy players in RvR areas and fighting right then and there.
Battlefields - Static, objective-based areas (take objective in question, plant flag, etc) that help to focus skirmish RvR a bit.
Scenarios - Instanced, point-balanced, objective-based "arenas." This is our closest cousin to Fantasy Battle. All players will be worth a certain number of points based on a "we're-not-discussing-how-at-the-moment" set of stats. Players will be matched up evenly and groups with fewer points will be bolstered by NPC "Dogs of War." Dogs of War will be - obviously - worth less than their PC counterparts, but they'll allow us to avoid long queues AND one side constantly enjoying a slight but significant advantage due to population wierdness.

Finally, we're relying on an extensive, year+ long beta, coupled with everything (good, bad and otherwise) that we've learned from Camelot.

The focus of the game makes it so you'll primarily be working with people of the same race, right?

Primarily, but by no means exclusively. Dwarfs, humans and High Elfs can all work together as they see fit. Ditto with orcs, Dark Elfs and Chaos warriors.

What default size group are you guys shooting for? 5, 6?

To be determined. Balance is crucial, especially for campaigns and city capturing, so this will be one of those "under microscopic scrutiny" issues that we bang on non-stop until it's just right.

How does PVE factor in to the game?

Fully-realized PvE is absolutely going to be there. Players don't ever need to set foot in any RvR zone in order to move through all four tiers. And vice-versa.

I would like to know how much time /played is your goal to "level" a character?

To be determined.

Leveling Grinds have been getting shorter and shorter, will Warhammer continues this trend?

By offering full-blown PvE and RvR in every tier, we hope to make the process essentially painless for most players. Nothing depresses our world designers more than the idea that people might blow through 80% of the stuff they hand-craft with love and disturbingly intense affection to get to the last portion of the game.

I am also interested in advancement through RvR. Will this be as speedy as normal "grinding", or at a mere fraction of normal XP rate?

I can't speak for final speeds, numbers, etc. but our intention is that players will find compelling reasons to engage in PvE AND RvR in all tiers.

How does the mechanics of tanking work?

Player collision for enemies. You won't collide with friendly PC characters, but you will with enemy units. As a result, you won't be able to simply run through enemy tanks in order to get to less defensively-significant players. You also won't be able to clip back and forth through someone to hit them from behind, then the side, then the front, etc.

I don't see what's stop people from running around you and getting to support guys.

Again, player collision is the one bit that's been announced. That said, it can be VERY effective for protecting less defensive players if groups know how to make use of it properly.

Will there be knock back of some kind?

To be determined. I'm personally a huge fan of it.

Are Halflings actually in Warhammer? I know they're the token comedy team in Bloodbowl but I haven't seen them in fantasy.

Yes. And - as noted above - they're DELICIOUS. Mmm... free range halfling... *drools*

[tazelbain]

Well, one of the things that's causing the "limited" classes is the requirement that every class be combat-effective and serve an immediately recognizable role. We have no pure "support" classes. In addition, we don't have rogues or stealth classes. We're not fond of hybrid classes either, though there will almost certainly be SOME degree of hybridization for some races.

Sounds boring.  Maybe there will be terrain tactical considerations to make up for the lack group tactics because this setup makes "focus fire" the one and only tactic.

Again, player collision is the one bit that's been announced. That said, it can be VERY effective for protecting less defensive players if groups know how to make use of it properly.

Interesting because all CD I have seen people go around it unless there is a narrow gap to block.

[HaemishM]

Btw, short version:

You say that Warhammer design is good because the power differentail between the ranks is small.

I say that I agree that the fact that the power differential being small would make the design of the game "good".

But at the same time there is no evidence from the descriptions of the mechanics we have that the power differential is, in fact, small.

That's all.

There is no evidence of anything, because all we have is design overviews and not how the game actually plays out. In other words, them chickens ain't hatched yet, no use counting the eggs.

[Johny Cee]

Well, one of the things that's causing the "limited" classes is the requirement that every class be combat-effective and serve an immediately recognizable role. We have no pure "support" classes. In addition, we don't have rogues or stealth classes. We're not fond of hybrid classes either, though there will almost certainly be SOME degree of hybridization for some races.

Sounds boring.  Maybe there will be terrain tactical considerations to make up for the lack group tactics because this setup makes "focus fire" the one and only tactic.

Could you elaborate on why lack of support would be boring?  Just curious,  since my experience would lead me to believe the opposite.

[tazelbain]

Sure.

First, I should say that I play healers.  I understand why they don't want support characters. Its hard to make support character useful and not mandatory.  So they got rid of them because there aren't very many people like me. I am fine with that, but I wouldn't have thrown my hands up in defeat. If they lack ideas for support abilities that aren't unbalancing they might want to take peruse through GW skill catalogue.

But support characters tend provide alternate combat tactics,  but since they are gone all you have left is "do as much damage as fast as possible." It's the proverbial 2 fighters trading blows until one falls over. It seems very boring even with some glass cannon classes thrown in. So all I am saying that if they are limiting tactics in this areas, they should expand tactics in another areas. And those buffs they called tactics in that Q&A are very poor substitute.

[angry.bob]

Having played a Midtard Healer in DAoC, I welcome the game being devoid of support and stealth classes. For one thing, no healing classes means no raids, or if there are they will have to be radically different than their conventional form. Besides, Warhammer itself is all about dealing damage. Other than the Tomb Kings summoning spell, a few magic weapon procs, and potions Warhammer is devoid of healing.

Plus, support classes like the Healer are the suck in RvR games. Sure, I could stun the hell out of people - at least until diminishing returns was added, but other than stunning people there was nothing for me to do until spreadheal was added years later. And trying to solo as a Healer was undoable past the late 40's.

[HRose]

You are dreaming if you are thinking there will be no healing in the game.

[HaemishM]

You are dreaming if you are thinking there will be no healing in the game.

There may be healing in the game (potions and such since that fits the mythos), but not HEALERS. Nobody dedicated to doing nothing but raising the hp bars of other players back up.

[eldaec]

I rather figured we'd gotten past the idea that modern games will ever feature 'pure' healers again after CoH and even EQ2 to an extent. Both games realised that the primary role of the priest type character should be buff/debuff using in-combat short-duration-large-effect buffs/debuffs.

I always end up playing priest classes - because at least a priest gets to make decisions, and ergo stays awake. But playing a CoH defender/corruptor or an EQ2 shaman is a hell of a lot more fun than a daoc cleric.

Player collision for enemies.

This alone makes rvr a massive leap forward from daoc. It'll do two things...

1 - remove the pressure to introduce crowd control
2 - reward playerskill, and specifically the ability to NOT WALK THROUGH THAT FRICKING GATE UNLESS I FUCKING SAY SO YOU MOUTH BREATHING FUCKTARDS! (whoa, sorry, started channelling my daoc cleric in rvr again)

Dwarfs, humans and High Elfs can all work together as they see fit. Ditto with orcs, Dark Elfs and Chaos warriors.

/shudder

[HRose]

2 - reward playerskill, and specifically the ability to

circle strafe.

[angry.bob]

2 - reward playerskill, and specifically the ability to

circle strafe.

Good circle straffing IS skill. Want to beat a shitty circle straffer? WALK BACKWARDS - a circle straffer without skills will die. Or if you've got m4d s|<1llz, counter-straffe them. CS and DoD have turned you youngsters into lazy crybabies with your fancy one-shot Kar98's and AWP's. Years of killing sentry turrets with a crowbar as a scout or killing anything with a Pyro builds seriously l33t circle straffing skills.

[eldaec]

Um, -ACC on the strafe button dealt with that just fine in any number of games where it was seen as a problem.

In daoc the degenerate run straight forward through the opponent and /face tactic was much more irritating.

[Arthur_Parker]

Some new screenshots

Love the gobin.

[eldaec]

Love the gobin.

OMGZ triple weild!  ;)

[HRose]

Good circle straffing IS skill.

I just don't like this type of twitch gameplay. See what Tobold wrote.

[stray]

Doesn't matter anyway. You're still on dialup, right?

[Yoru]

Good circle straffing IS skill.

I just don't like this type of twitch gameplay. See what Tobold wrote.

Don't worry. There's plenty of games coming out for people who don't like having to actually interact with their character. Plenty.

[HRose]

In Mount & Blade there's plenty of twitch combat and "interaction". You still don't circle-strafe.

[angry.bob]

I just don't like this type of twitch gameplay. See what Tobold wrote.

So what sort of twitch game do you want to play then? Because what that guy you linked to is talking about is far twitchier than any FPS or circle strafing. High, medium, and low attacks and corresponding blocks. With movement keys that’s 10 keys and all 10 digits in use before accounting for any specials or item activations. That’s too much involvement for just basic combat, and having to hunt for keys in the middle of a fight means you’re dead. You could cut down on the number of keys/fingers you’d need by making different combinations of keys do different attacks or blocks, but If wanted to dick around with combos and that much precision button work, I’d just go play fucking Soul Caliber and r0xx0r with Voldo. Even if I wanted to get that involved with the most basic level combat, it would suck anyway. Every serious player in the game would just have a sequence of attacks programmed into a USB gamepad so they can just run up to you and execute a series of attacks faster than it would be possible to react to and block. Frankly, until they invent thought control game helmets, some sort of motion capture suit, or even a gay DDR stomping mat, that level of involvement sucks in practice. And really, by the time you’re wearing some stupid suit or dancing around a DDR mat, you may as well go out and sword fight for real with one of the 9 million fruity larp/SCA/Renfaire groups in the country.

Circle strafing is easy to defeat, especially with collision detection. And it’s easy to adjust if need be: -ACC would work fine. And really, two fighters strafing each other with –ACC is just a nitpicky way of saying they’re circling each other looking for openings. Watch every entertaining fight scene in any fantasy/martial arts movie and you’ll see a ton of “strafing”

Bottom line, it’s a game. I’m more concerned that my game be fun than be a realistic simulation of what really would have happened when Theodoric of Lancaster hit Willem of Burgandy on his right pauldron with a flamgerge instead of his left. Collision detection fixes most of the mechanical side of what’s bad about group PvP and adds nothing bad to it. Will people circle strafe? Sure, I know I will. But they can circle strafe now, it’s just easier to run right through you over and over again 

But since your so brilliant, what’s your genius plan to prevent the utter game breaking horror of circle strafing? And it can’t be a crowd control function renamed as something else.

[HRose]

I don't think you need innovative ideas to fix that kind of problem, even if those ideas are on a more radical level (for example about realistic attack types instead of the 34958345 types of effects you can apply and the corresponding numbers of buttons on your screen. I always said that you should ideally be able to play any class with a joypad. If you need more than 6-8 buttons then both the designer and the game are lame).

The single problem about circle strafing is relaitive to the controls. So it should be fixed with some work on the controls.

To begin with I always wanted to nerf the bunny-hopping that I find irritating in every game, with people jumping all over the place and, often, all around you. Rogues in WoW in particular seem to love this.

The idea is to make jumping lose endurance and precision on the attacks. So if you jump all over the place while in combat you would perform poorly. The rest of the problems could be solved by implementing different types of movement. Movement while you are running around and movement while you are actively in combat and trying to swing a big piece of metal.

I'd just slow down the in-combat movement so that positioning would be more tactical instead of twitch. In this case circlestrafing would be pretty much useless.

Slowing down the movement during combat is a valid point if you like a more realistic combat than a super-fast arcade. I like to think to twitch elements as unique and appropriate. For example the Mount & Blade example is a good one because, while twitch, it plays completely differently from an arcade FPS. Instead of just increasing the speed three times, add superjumps and multiple attacks a second.

Because it tries to create gameplay that is appropriate for that setting. You don't have DOTs, AOE, fear effects, buffs, debuffs and all the rest in M&B. Nor you have these in a fantasy *setting*. You have these only in mmorpgs and the proliferation of stupid combat mechanics.

I ranted against Raph for a few months recently because he stated that game mechanics are and should be completely independent from the setting. This is an heresy for me. The setting should determine directly the way you are implementing the game mechanics to simulate exactly that type of game. One of the reasons why I hated SWG it's because the combat was so stupid and abstract. That was a game that should have included FPS gameplay element like arcs of fire, positioning, cover. Instead of standing still and shooting twenty types of different "laser effects" and stupid particle attacks.

[stray]

Penalities on jumping? You might as well not even include the shit at all, or even call it a game.

Oh yeah, and like I said earlier: Get off of dialup. Then I'll start listening.

[HRose]

Penalities on jumping?

No "penalities on jumping".

The penalties are on the attacks if you are jumping.

[stray]

What's the difference?

Wait, don't answer that.

[Arthur_Parker]

I find the jumping slightly annoying in COD2, it's used to make targeting more difficult, I do it sometimes too but it's cheap and doesn't really fit WWII.  Circle strafing doesn't bother me.

New Warhammer E3 gameplay footage linky.

[eldaec]

Why the hell has this thread suddenly become a thread about solving trivial MMOG design problems THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN SOLVED and implemented in every mmog where they were an issue in the last X years?

Did I miss a memo?

Jumping costs you END. There. Problem solved.

Or -ACC.

That's good too.

Now please, for the love god, can we go back to posting cool pictures of goblins holding too many knives, and commenting on how 'TWO IS THE WRONG NUMBER OF REALMS'.

Sheesh.

[Chenghiz]

Jumping in WoW gets you nowhere. People who jump have no more advantage than people who don't. It's a eflex move and it keeps their fingers active. One of my guild's MTs jumps while tanking because he claims it keeps him paying attention or somthing.

[eldaec]

STOP IT.