Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    I have reopened the thread.

    Anyway, i'm monitoring this thread, be aware of the direction is going.
    Last edited by Coldkil; 2012-09-10 at 09:10 PM.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Coldkil View Post
    I have reopened the thread.

    Anyway, i'm monitoring this thread, be aware of the direction is going.
    Thank you for reopening this thread,

    Back to subject. It is true that all specs have unique gimics and each spec times the execution of ability's differently somewhat, the point i was trying to make was since we fill the melee dps role, which is static all pure dps classes usually fill the one role ranged dps or melee dps. That point i was getting at was this, is it justified to have multiple specs for our class as it is for others. We all usually fill one role, Now given the addition of this new Talent (perk) system is their any real reason to not simply have our play styles as a Talent (perk) and not an entirely new spec.

    For example paladins respec to play a new role, we respec to play a new style of doing the same thing. Which is why i spoke about the new druid spec, clearly blizzard recognize that the Spec system is being used to fill roles for raids and if that is true why then do we need 3 specs to fill the same role. The ability's we use are very similar would it not be easier to simple allow rogues to chose the talents (perks) we want which define our play style.

    I will finish with this, I feel like rogues are half in and half out of a proper talent (perk) system, we are a pure dps class we cannot do multiple roles, surly we could pick and chose our own play style on the fly with a proper talent (perk) system. What other advantage does a pure class have, surely we should be able to chose exactly what is needed for each fight without having to respec, it seems like an extra hassle to have in what could be a very interesting system. Which is why i don't get it.
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 01:52 AM.

  3. #43
    At this point, yes the specs are justified. They are different enough that people have preferences. There is also the bonus of having certain fights favor certain specs so that you get to experience alternate play styles every now and then instead of just the same thing through the entire expansion. You could combine all the specs, but the result will be 1 spec with 1 optimal way to play it and no other options ever. Our specs may not be as different as moonkin and feral, but how is eliminating any variation and forcing us to always do the exact same thing (as opposed to a similar but different thing like we do now) an improvement for our class?

    Also, how do we not currently have the ability to pick our perks on the fly? In 5.0 talents were separated from specs so you never need to have both your specs be the same (for example, I had a hemo and a backstab sub spec for DS in 4.3 which would be rather silly now) so we can have 2/3 of our specs ready on the fly. We can also choose talents on the fly. Why is respeccing a hassle? It just requires you to be ooc and a minor cast time.

    BTW, thanks, much appreciation for the paragraphs

  4. #44
    I would not be removing anything, The way i would do it is simply have an additional Talent(perk) line for pure dps classes so that they can basically swap play style on the fly.

    Eg, perk of sub - enhances backstab damage, causes find weakness for ability's and allows use of shadow dance,
    perk of combat - allows use of killing spree enhances energy regen and allows use of cleave
    perk of mutilate - allows use of hunger for blood, chance on hit to get instant attack

    I am missing some bits and bobs but you get the gist, their is no reason for this not to be the case. The current perk system implements this to an extent and what i am saying is this, in a raid with 10 or 12 bosses, as a pure dps class who specialize in nothing but melee dps the same role 3 times. Why do we have to respec to optimize when the actual buttons we push are pretty much the same minus the gimics, why not have 1 pure rogue class with an options as talents (perks) which change game play slightly and fills in the missing gimics.

    All 3 specs do the same role and yet we must respec to our favorite gimics , they clearly see that some classes have a need for 4 and based on that they must see that we only really need 1, this could be our advantage over hybrids.Always having the perfect rogue for each and every fight would be fitting for a pure dps class, Fiddling with the spec swapping its just an extra hassle, a hassle fitting of a hybrid class and not specialized melee dps
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 01:55 AM.

  5. #45
    Um that is what we have... we can swap on the fly between those 3 examples you gave. We also get a different play style to accompany each spec. You are still dividing it into 3 specs... what is the difference? You call it a perk, they call it a spec. You are still suggesting we choose one and get a different play style based on our choice... that is exactly what we have. You keep referring to hunger for blood, so I'm gonna have to ask again, do you currently play a rogue? It doesn't seem like it.

    If you combine the specs, you essentially remove things whether they are in the spell book or not. For example, if you have both mutilate and backstab, you might as well only ever have 1 because 1 of those two will be better than the other and therefore the lesser one might as well not exist. Its like how (and I think it might actually be gone in MoP) feral druids for the longest time had mangle and that ability (claw?) it entirely replaced. No one ever touched that once you had mangle, so it basically got removed.

  6. #46
    Huger for blood is its name from a while back its mark for dead or something stupid now, yea you should see me trying to find the pally trainer as well i always turn left.
    This is not what we have, if we where to commit to a full talent(perk) system then things like find weakness and hunger for blood, blade flurry could be options also.

    The trend blizzard has set for specializations is that they fit one of the 4 game play roles, its not justifiable to have 3 specs for 1 roles
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 01:56 AM.

  7. #47
    If you believe that the 3 specs can be played the same with the same results, you are very much mistaken. The way to optimally play each spec is very different. Each spec has a different mechanic that it focuses on and can be micro managed through (i.e. Envenom uptimes, cd management, etc).

    Having a world top parse means nothing anymore. It only shows how much your raid group planned around boosting your dps while potentially lowering theirs. In a real world progression standpoint, it is better to play the spec that most helps for the current encounter (cleave, aoe, etc).

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Superp View Post
    Huger for blood is its name from a while back its mark for dead or something stupid now, yea you should see me trying to find the pally trainer as well i always turn left.
    This is not what we have, if we where to commit to a full perk system then things like find weakness and hunger for blood, blade flurry could be options also.

    The trend blizzard has set for talent specializations is that they fit one of the 4 game play roles, its not justifiable to have 3 specs for 1 roles
    Hunger for blood and Vandetta are NOT the same thing. I honestly can't believe you have much experience on a rogue if you think they are.

    No, that basically is what we have. Now you are saying to share some extra stuff that is spec specific, but you mentioned 3 different specs where their differing features listed were identical to the differing features on live. Now you are suggesting that some of the differing features we have on live could be available across specs, but your model is exactly the same as the live model. The only difference is the specifics where you want to hand around more abilities like FW, and BF.

    What trend is that? Warriors have always had 2 dps trees. Priests have always had 2 healing trees. All pure dps classes have always had 3 dps trees. The trend is that each spec has a different play style so that which ever class you play you have options in case you don't like the play style of a certain spec (granted they haven't always done the best job keeping the options viable for serious pve/pvp). There are only 3 roles recognized by blizzard. Many people considered vanilla/bc to have 4 roles as previous successful mmorpgs did have a 4th role (it being utility) but blizzard clearly squashed that idea with WotLK. I already told you what the justification was... so that we can have more than 1 play style. It would be pretty dumb to give locks the option of focusing on pets, dots, or nukes to alter their play style and then not create ways for rogues to alter theirs.

    And you are still with your suggestion saying we should have 3 specs for one role, you just are calling it perks instead of specs. You can call your Ford Focus a Ferrari, but at the end of the day when everyone sees it, they know it is a Focus (and I hope you are American as I don't think they sell that model in the EU but whatever). You can call those things perks, but they are obvious mirrors to our current specs.

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by Sesshou View Post
    Hunger for blood and Vandetta are NOT the same thing. I honestly can't believe you have much experience on a rogue if you think they are.

    No, that basically is what we have. Now you are saying to share some extra stuff that is spec specific, but you mentioned 3 different specs where their differing features listed were identical to the differing features on live. Now you are suggesting that some of the differing features we have on live could be available across specs, but your model is exactly the same as the live model. The only difference is the specifics where you want to hand around more abilities like FW, and BF.

    What trend is that? Warriors have always had 2 dps trees. Priests have always had 2 healing trees. All pure dps classes have always had 3 dps trees. The trend is that each spec has a different play style so that which ever class you play you have options in case you don't like the play style of a certain spec (granted they haven't always done the best job keeping the options viable for serious pve/pvp). There are only 3 roles recognized by blizzard. Many people considered vanilla/bc to have 4 roles as previous successful mmorpgs did have a 4th role (it being utility) but blizzard clearly squashed that idea with WotLK. I already told you what the justification was... so that we can have more than 1 play style. It would be pretty dumb to give locks the option of focusing on pets, dots, or nukes to alter their play style and then not create ways for rogues to alter theirs.

    And you are still with your suggestion saying we should have 3 specs for one role, you just are calling it perks instead of specs. You can call your Ford Focus a Ferrari, but at the end of the day when everyone sees it, they know it is a Focus (and I hope you are American as I don't think they sell that model in the EU but whatever). You can call those things perks, but they are obvious mirrors to our current specs.
    Ford focus sells pretty well in EU and I have one On the topic, you will never agree because there is fundamental disagreement in your arguments and the logic that backs them up. According to you there are 3 roles recognised by blizz and pure classes respec to change playstyle. According to OP, rogues have 1 role to fill anyway and that role has more or less the same playstyle delivered by any spec you choose. Therefor, he asks all the arsenal to be available from one spec instead of respecing.

    I do agree though that picking talents stead of perks sounds same concept, hence my previous arguments were more evolution and homogenisation oriented.
    Last edited by catablitz; 2012-09-11 at 11:07 AM.

  10. #50
    Don't wanna go into things as I think both sides have their pro's and con's here. The only relevant thing is that unfortunately Blizz thinks our class is fine. If they wanted to change anything they would have said more than a "Rogues are fine,deal with it." post on the huge topic that was on the us class forums. Aside from probable number tweaking nothing will happen in the following 2 weeks, and even after that the maximum we will get is a "vanish doesn't break when a hunter pet looks at you" fix , maybe with some dps hotfixes.

  11. #51
    Actually the "art" of playing the different specs are quite different. If you just want to get SnD and Rupture up then spam CD's and finishers, then chose Combat. If you use that approach for Assassination you are clipping the Envenom buff which greatly gimps your DPS and does not allow your energy to build up for those expensive Mutilates. Subtlety should almost never use Backstab to generate the 5th CP, you should wait and let your energy build up while waiting for a Honor Among Thieves CP.

    These minor deviations are what alllow rogues to be tops in DPS. If you just spam CP generators and fire off finishers, you will do decent numbers and no one will know the difference. But that spamming buttons without thought is what makes the specs look so identical and monotinous. Waiting for that 5th CP from HAT can be nerve racking, but it is what makes the "art" of rogue play interesting to me.

    In general I agree that Blizzard has made them way to homogenous... why remove the value in Recuperate from the Subtlety rotation? I always thought keeping SnD, Rupture, and Recuperate a huge challenge that gave huge rewards when done correctly.

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Superp View Post
    With mages the spells they use changes the rotation changes

    what do we do?

    Well iam sub so i get slice and dice and rupture up and combo gen and finisher

    Well iam combat so i get slice and dice up and rupture then combo gen and finisher

    Well screw that guys iam mutiliate so i get slice and dice, rupture and then i combo gen and finisher
    Mages are in the same boat.

    As Arcane, you keep up your dot, spam your nuke until Missiles procs, then hit it.
    As Fire, you keep up your dot, spam your nuke until Pyroblast procs, then hit it.
    As Frost, you keep up your dot, spam your nuke until one of your two procs procs, then hit them. (Yay, frost gets two procs)

    (sounds a lot like Elemental Shaman, too, for what it's worth)

    See also: http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...nd-homogenized
    Humans are the only species on the planet smart enough to be this stupid.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by catablitz View Post
    Ford focus sells pretty well in EU and I have one On the topic, you will never agree because there is fundamental disagreement in your arguments and the logic that backs them up. According to you there are 3 roles recognised by blizz and pure classes respec to change playstyle. According to OP, rogues have 1 role to fill anyway and that role has more or less the same playstyle delivered by any spec you choose. Therefor, he asks all the arsenal to be available from one spec instead of respecing.

    I do agree though that picking talents stead of perks sounds same concept, hence my previous arguments were more evolution and homogenisation oriented.
    I agree, that we (meaning me and the OP) won't agree. Its not a difference in logic, as I already pointed out there is none in his opening post. Pretty everyone much agrees that "rogue that plays the same regardless of spec" is a false statement; he over generalized that to the point it can't be true anymore (not going to quote the whole thing again). Even in your post you rather carefully worded it as "more or less" implying there are differences. And see he isn't asking for the whole arsenal to be available (though that is what I thought he was saying at first). His post above clearly shows he wants 3 choices, he just doesn't want to call them specs (and would also allow some abilities across specs), but whatever you call them officially, everyone who sees what he lined out for assassination/combat/sub will look at it and still see specs, so why rename it?

    And I wouldn't say that is just according to me. Log into WoW and select a role in a raid, how many choices are there? 3. If blizzard thought there were 4 roles like he said, don't you think there would be a 4th option to check? As for the play style thing, are you seriously going to argue against me that blizzard does not intend rogues 3 specs to play differently (or the 3 hunter spec, or the 3 warlock specs)? Why do you think they gave each spec a different mastery with a different focus if they don't want there to be an option with a different play style?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thanclan View Post
    In general I agree that Blizzard has made them way to homogenous... why remove the value in Recuperate from the Subtlety rotation? I always thought keeping SnD, Rupture, and Recuperate a huge challenge that gave huge rewards when done correctly.
    I would guess the main reason is they don't want us healing to be a dps gain. And honestly its basically the same now (in that the main focus is on keeping up 2 finishers and hemo dot). We have to manually keep up rupture which has a shorter duration than recuperate where as before we could largely ignore it once we put it up at the start. I mean yeah you could run into trouble if you put up a 5cp snd and then a 5cp recup and your rupture maybe could fall, but in 4.3 the main focus was just snd, hemo, recup and let the talent take care of rupture.
    Last edited by Sesshou; 2012-09-11 at 07:58 PM.

  14. #54
    First of all, any raid leader worth his salt would never run all melee dps, Secondly The reason druids have 4 specs is because they fill 4 roles. you cannot deny that ranged dps is a role to fill, you cannot always run all ranged and you cannot always run all melee, a well balanced raid is always needed unless your raid experience is limited to LFR

    wowwiki - "Hunger for Blood is a rogue ability introduced in patch 3.0.2. It provides rogues with a large damage buff to their attacks provided that one bleed effect is on their target.",

    Vendetta
    30 yd range
    Instant 2 min cooldown
    Marks an enemy for death, increasing all damage you deal to the target by 30% and granting you unerring vision of your target, regardless of concealments such as stealth and invisibility. Lasts 20 sec.

    It was a 41 point tallent that got reworked and renamed to a 31 point talent, so stop with that nonsense its a rehash of the same spell. However all of that is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with the debate, What is relevant is that this new perk system stole some defining features of each spec, now that we share some cool and important ability's it just feels half done.

    If you feel like i am crazy and should go away, cool fine but think about this. If it was impossible to share important ability's like find weakness and blade flurry and hunger why then do we even have a talent (perk) system what is the purpose of a perk system that is "half implemented", why would they shy away from the functioning old talent system and implement the new talent (perk) system if they were not going to fully commit, its silly and i don't get it.

    I am not great with English, i do put some effort into my posts, some times they just don't read correctly. I do edit and try to fix if i can, if you have a problem with that then tough cookies.
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 01:59 AM.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Superp View Post
    First of all, any raid leader worth his salt would never run all melee dps, Secondly The reason druids have 4 specs is because they fill 4 roles. you cannot deny that ranged dps is a role to fill, you cannot always run all ranged and you cannot always run all melee, a well balanced raid is always needed unless your raid experience is limited to LFR

    It was a 41 point tallent that got reworked and renamed to a 31 point talent, so stop with that nonsense its a rehash of the same spell. However all of that is irrelevant as it has nothing to do with the debate, What is relevant is that this new perk system stole some defining features of each spec, now that we share some cool and important ability's it just feels half done.

    If you feel like i am crazy and should go away, cool fine but think about this. If it was impossible to share important ability's like find weakness and blade flurry and hunger why then do we even have a perk system what is the purpose of a perk system that is "half implemented", why would they shy away from a functioning talent system and implement a perk system if they were not going to fully commit, its silly and i don't get it.

    I am not great with English, i do put some effort into my posts, some times they just don't read correctly. I do edit and try to fix if i can, if you have a problem with that then tough cookies.
    First off, I'm not trying to pick on your english and idc if you don't even know the english names if your client is in another language. Like when you said 'mark for dead' I knew that was vendetta. My problem is you are calling 2 different abilities the same thing. Hunger for blood is a self buff which essentially 100% uptime and you just maintain it kinda like SnD (except HfB wasn't a finisher). Vendetta is a dps cooldown. There is a huge difference between a self buff you keep up 'all' the time and a dps cooldown, in fact the entire mechanic is different because the idea of a cooldown (such as Vendetta) is that you have to decide when to use it. Thats like saying HfB and AR are the same, and AR is about as close to Vendetta as HfB is if not closer.

    Melee and ranged are both types of dps. You are free to consider them entirely separate roles instead of subsets of the same role, but they are subsets of the same role. You talk about needlessly splitting things and how its needless that we have 3 specs, yet you want to needlessly split a single role into its subsets? Why not go further? How about we say there are 8 roles: healer, tank, leather melee, plate melee, chain melee, cloth ranged, leather ranged, mail ranged? Or how about something a little less silly, 5 roles: healer, tank, agi dps, str dps, int dps. Thats pretty much what you are wanting to do, opting to divide a category further instead of lumping it together like blizzard does.

    No, you wouldn't take all melee just like you wouldn't take all hunters. You in general want to vary your dps to gain the different benefits they all bring, with the exception being where one's mechanics out weigh the benefit of the other classes. Blizzard doesn't consider them separate or they would allow you to pick ranged dps or melee dps when you queue for stuff. Blizzard also allows you to get into a dungeon with only melee dps and they don't care. In fact it was a big deal that the game itself in 4.3 had no way of telling if a person is ranged or melee dps just that they are dps which is why enh shaman can roll on ele gear and feral druids can roll on chicken gear.

    What perk system? We have none, how is it half implemented. We have specs and talents. Why would they implement a brand new "perk" system in the first place when it functions just like their current spec system? Or are you using "perk" as an equivalent word to "talent"? Maybe that is just a language problem, but then I'd be confused as you previously were in the same post comparing your suggested perk system with our current specs?
    Last edited by Sesshou; 2012-09-11 at 11:12 PM.

  16. #56
    The one ability required a bleed on your target to activate it, and if you have a bleed active you cannot stealth properly + damage buff%
    The other puts a debuff on target, when activated the target cannot stealth properly + damage debuff.

    Now if you cannot see that these ability's are copy's then thats your problem, i like the earlier version better and i consider it the better option and so to me as long as the function remains the same the ability will be known to me as hunger, just as assimilation will be known to me as mutilate if you don't like that tough.

    Stop derailing my thread with such nonsense, because it holds no value in this context, you are trying to demerit my view because i am set in my ways. Its just grade A trolling.
    It is quire clearly a half implemented talent (perk) system, i don't understand why anyone one would deny that. Yes we do have 3 specs but the question i am asking is why?
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 02:01 AM.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Superp View Post
    The one ability required a bleed on your target to activate it, and if you have a bleed active you cannot stealth properly + damage buff%
    The other puts a debuff on target, when activated the target cannot stealth properly + damage debuff.

    Now if you cannot see that these ability's are copy's then thats your problem, i like the earlier version better and i consider it the better option and so to me as long as the function remains the same the ability will be known to me as hunger, just as assimilation will be known to me as mutilate if you don't like that tough.

    Stop derailing my thread with such trivial nonsense because holds no value in this context, you are trying to demerit my view because i am set in my ways. Its just grade A trolling.
    It is quire clearly a half implemented perk system, i don't understand why anyone one would deny that. Yes we do have 3 specs but that question i am asking is why.
    Except the functionality is completely different. HfB is a buff you keep up all the time and is on yourself giving you a bonus against everything. Vendetta is a cooldown which is up a fraction of the time and is tied to 1 specific target. Also the bleed requirement was there to force ramp up time, and didn't necessarily stop stealthing as HfB lasted 1 min so you could easily not have them bleeding for all of that. Vendetta also only works for you, no one else can see them, and therefore bleeding some one to prevent stealth is not redundant and in general is still a good idea. You are basically saying priest's fortitude and warrior last stand are identical... HfB and Vendetta bring damage, fort and LS bring hit points. In both cases they are incredibly different as the former are buffs you generally have all the time and the latter are cooldowns you only have activated for a limited amount of time and stress the importance of using them at the proper time. I brought it up because you not knowing they are different abilities leads me to question your experience as a rogue. The experience of the person offering a suggestion is absolutely relevant.

    What perk system? Explain. We have specs which mirror your idea of perks, we have talents. Unless you are using perks as a synonym for either "talent" or "spec" (which I already asked if that was the case, you have yet to answer) we have no such thing. Neither the specs nor the talents are half implemented. We have 3 specs with different play styles and unique focuses, and we have talents that are designed independent of the specs (granted most of which are recycled or dumb).

    We have 3 specs. You say we don't need 3 specs. Then you say you want to implement "perks" and have 3 options that parallel our current specs. Wtf is the point of that? We basically have what you are suggesting now, but it is called a spec because that is the naming convention they decided to use for every class in wow.

  18. #58
    The Patient BlackBoss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Savannah
    Posts
    233
    I hear ya! I play an unholy dk and the talent system of mop i pretty much pushing frost and unholy together in play style and weaponry especially with the soul reaper spell.
    CPU :- Intel i5 4670k
    Ram :- 12gb DDR3
    Mobo :- Asus Sabertooth z87 TUFF series
    GPU :- MSI GTX 680 Twin Frozr
    Cooling :- ZALMAN Reserator 3 MAX Ultimate Water/Liquid CPU Cooler 120MM

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by Sesshou View Post

    We have 3 specs. You say we don't need 3 specs. Then you say you want to implement "perks" and have 3 options that parallel our current specs. Wtf is the point of that? We basically have what you are suggesting now, but it is called a spec because that is the naming convention they decided to use for every class in wow.
    The spec system is only a hassle it has no benefit over a full Talent (perk) system, it feels like we have 3 specs for no other reason than just cause other people have 3. Like i said imagine if we where forced to have 4 specs because of druids, how ridiculous would that be.

    I make that point because i want to stretch the already stupid idea of having 3 specs for us now, there is just not a huge amount of variation between the play styles right now. ofc they have quirks and gimicks but nothing game changing.
    Last edited by Superp; 2012-09-15 at 02:02 AM.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Superp View Post
    The talent system is only a hassle it has no benefit over a full perk system, it feels like we have 3 talent specs for no other reason than "just cause" other people have 3. Like i said imagine if we where forced to have 4 specs because of druids, how ridiculous would that be.

    I make that point because i want to stretch the already stupid idea of having 3 specs for us now, there is just not a huge amount of variation between the play styles right now. ofc they have quirks and gimicks but nothing game changing.
    Ok, look, I don't want to pick on your english, but you really need to clear up what you are talking about with 'perk' 'talent' and 'spec' because you are for sure using 'spec' and 'talent' interchangeably when they are totally different things, and I also think you are probably using 'perk' interchangeably with those two terms sometimes also. That is making it really hard to understand what you are trying to say.

    Like you said "the talent system" are you talking about the 3 specs when you say that because those 3 specs have nothing to do with talents? Do you have a problem with the talents as well that you are saying your perk system would fix? I mean a lot of them are crap, but like the design they went with for talents? Are you also saying that is bad in addition to your argument about specs? Now you also said "we have 3 talent specs for no other reason than "just cause"" which I'm guessing is referring to specs as well not talents, though I would agree that it does feel like on some rows of the talent tree we only got 3 choices because they just "had" to find a 3rd option.

    And you want to "stretch the already stupid idea of having 3 specs for us" by giving us a choice between three perks that you outlined as follows:
    perk of sub - enhances backstab damage, causes find weakness for ability's and allows use of shadow dance,
    perk of combat - allows use of killing spree enhances energy regen and allows use of cleave
    perk of mutilate - allows use of hunger for blood, chance on hit to get instant attack
    How does that serve a different function than how we currently choose a spec? Yeah you are suggesting moving some abilities around, but you are still suggesting we choose from the same number of choices and from choices really similar to what we have now. I can't see how you can be so adamant about the fact that 3 specs is needless, but your 'fix' for the problem is nearly identical to what we have.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •