The avrious gundam unvierses should be considered different shows as the only things I can think of that they all ahve arE:
Earth colonized space sometime in the past
mecha
A mobile suit or suits called gundam.
And even in the latter its hazy. For example, in Gundam Wing, there're several original gundam and theyre called that because they're made of gundanium. Whereas in some other universes the names simply aesthetic, and in soem universes there's only 1 gundam not several. Even the mecha and the style are different. I can count around 10 types of mecha in gundam wing including mobile dolls, whereas smoth managed to make an entire mod out of the original UC timeline.
Simply put, you cant compare gundam timelines, theyre very very different. So be careful about it.
Supcom Expansion
Moderator: Moderators
Thanks for clearing up what gundam is "about." It has really proven to me, deep down inside, that... wait, wait, we're talking about supcom... I'm lost. 
And hold on, I think I need to say for the seventh time now that you can replace "gundam" with almost any other mecha show, and my argument still stands. I've got nothing against Gundam as a show (I think what I've watched so far is passable, at the very least), and I've never played your mod, so if I can hardly be against it. No need to defend something with such fervor when it's not even under attack.
Show us how it would be sensible balance-wise. These sorts of posts make you sound as if all you're interested in is eye candy and, although I've never played your mod, since I know you're a respected modder this surely isn't the case.
Something just occurred to me, actually. You'll have to forgive me since as you know, I'm very busy with my job and I don't get to play much, but I think Aeon aircraft, or at least the ones we've seen as being once designed to open/close, were saucer-like in appearance. Being closed would eliminate their airfoil entirely, making them fall like a brick. Perhaps if they were on the ground, being closed would make them more aerodynamic, but if they were closed, the ground is the only place they'd go. We could go one step further and say, "Aeon probably possesses advanced engine tech, so that's not a problem," but this would mean that aerodynamics were basically no longer an issue anyway.
Besides this, let's keep the discussion calm and on-topic. There's no need for the allcaps, and everyone but you appears to have realized this has nothing to do with Gundam or you personally, aside from you being the party with complaints against SupCom's graphics.
And hold on, I think I need to say for the seventh time now that you can replace "gundam" with almost any other mecha show, and my argument still stands. I've got nothing against Gundam as a show (I think what I've watched so far is passable, at the very least), and I've never played your mod, so if I can hardly be against it. No need to defend something with such fervor when it's not even under attack.Not what this thread is about though.Massive, neon, bipedal cyclops with swords, that is more what gundam is about.
My argument is that it's virtually impossible to balance, your argument is that it this supposition doesn't matter and would look cool, and since form and function actually matter in an RTS, it should be implemented. I must disagree, since all of that is universally accepted as being false, and besides which it goes against my ideals of gameplay over graphics.THE AIRCRAFT BEING closed up WOULD MAKE them MORE AERODYNAMIC WHICH WOULD MAKE SENSE! the weapons being stowed away IS REALISTIC! IT LOOKS GOOD AND HAS FORM AND FUNCTION. Part of the reason a tomcat looks cool is because it is functionaly interesting.
Show us how it would be sensible balance-wise. These sorts of posts make you sound as if all you're interested in is eye candy and, although I've never played your mod, since I know you're a respected modder this surely isn't the case.
Something just occurred to me, actually. You'll have to forgive me since as you know, I'm very busy with my job and I don't get to play much, but I think Aeon aircraft, or at least the ones we've seen as being once designed to open/close, were saucer-like in appearance. Being closed would eliminate their airfoil entirely, making them fall like a brick. Perhaps if they were on the ground, being closed would make them more aerodynamic, but if they were closed, the ground is the only place they'd go. We could go one step further and say, "Aeon probably possesses advanced engine tech, so that's not a problem," but this would mean that aerodynamics were basically no longer an issue anyway.
Besides this, let's keep the discussion calm and on-topic. There's no need for the allcaps, and everyone but you appears to have realized this has nothing to do with Gundam or you personally, aside from you being the party with complaints against SupCom's graphics.
I'm going to leave you at that, you do not watch much mecha anime so you have little knowledge of the wide variety of systems some being entirely organic, steampunk and other use magic as a source of power to heat things to run pneumatics.. point was that SEED is one type of mecha.
caydr, who says they use a normal method of propulsion, as much as I would love to see a ship like the one in flight of the navigator, they are not like that or disks, that is the czar. I know you are busy with your job and all. However, as a FAN of supcom, I am sure you will recognize this stuff:
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=26
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=90
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=91
now how can someone make the form/function deal work out to benifit gameplay? How about this they are FASTER when they are not open, meaning they reach the battle and take a slight decrease in speed when they reach, meaning they slow down a bit when they really need to use their weapons. They could also have an increased armor versus kinetic type weapons while closed up. Hell, even the tanks could take reduced damage from bombing when closed up.
there are many ways to make it work and they take little imagination.
caydr, who says they use a normal method of propulsion, as much as I would love to see a ship like the one in flight of the navigator, they are not like that or disks, that is the czar. I know you are busy with your job and all. However, as a FAN of supcom, I am sure you will recognize this stuff:
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=26
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=90
http://www.supcomuniverse.com/?p=image&id=91
now how can someone make the form/function deal work out to benifit gameplay? How about this they are FASTER when they are not open, meaning they reach the battle and take a slight decrease in speed when they reach, meaning they slow down a bit when they really need to use their weapons. They could also have an increased armor versus kinetic type weapons while closed up. Hell, even the tanks could take reduced damage from bombing when closed up.
there are many ways to make it work and they take little imagination.
I don't know exactly where it was I read this, but there was an interview with Chris Taylor that talked about how they didn't bust their asses to make this game. He talked about how in the past, which I assume is TA era, everyone would be pulling all nighters and be working really hard. He said that kind of work climate just wasn't plausible anymore because everyone on their team was older and had families now.
It was pretty easy to see that this did effect the quality of the game, although, I would find it hard to blame GPG and their staff. It is possible that it was THQ that put some pretty nasty deadlines on SUPCOM and it had to get rushed out of the door. Why didn't the game fail with consumers then? Well, the new gaming demographic with all the money hasn't really played Total Annihilation, the effect that this has is HUGE.*
For example, they spent a lot of time on hyping up strategic zoom and cool experimental units, and a lot of people bought into and while they possibly could have been a little disappointed when they realized that they were not going to field 20 experimentals in an heated battle right out of the box, they were still satisfied with the game because they have not played Total Annihilation or even similar rts games, this makes the whole interface something new and exciting to them.
I think this is where a lot of us have problems with the game, because we've been playing 80% of supcom's game play for the past 10 years with TA and Spring. We're thirsty for something that has all the appeal of our TA and our Spring, but we want a massive improvement on even that which still retains all of the features we've become dependent on.
*If you browse around the supreme commander forums, there are a lot of people who are like; WHAT IS THIS TOTAL ANNIHILATION YOU SPEAK OF?
Additionally, the game is rated E10+, that does a lot in terms of general consumer attraction.
It was pretty easy to see that this did effect the quality of the game, although, I would find it hard to blame GPG and their staff. It is possible that it was THQ that put some pretty nasty deadlines on SUPCOM and it had to get rushed out of the door. Why didn't the game fail with consumers then? Well, the new gaming demographic with all the money hasn't really played Total Annihilation, the effect that this has is HUGE.*
For example, they spent a lot of time on hyping up strategic zoom and cool experimental units, and a lot of people bought into and while they possibly could have been a little disappointed when they realized that they were not going to field 20 experimentals in an heated battle right out of the box, they were still satisfied with the game because they have not played Total Annihilation or even similar rts games, this makes the whole interface something new and exciting to them.
I think this is where a lot of us have problems with the game, because we've been playing 80% of supcom's game play for the past 10 years with TA and Spring. We're thirsty for something that has all the appeal of our TA and our Spring, but we want a massive improvement on even that which still retains all of the features we've become dependent on.
*If you browse around the supreme commander forums, there are a lot of people who are like; WHAT IS THIS TOTAL ANNIHILATION YOU SPEAK OF?
Additionally, the game is rated E10+, that does a lot in terms of general consumer attraction.
You're right, those clearly aren't saucer shaped. I figured there had to be more than the one or two that I'm familiar with.
However, having now seen examples of units you'd like to see open/close, I have renewed confidence that these animations would harm gameplay, because of the time needed to perform a non-idiotic open/close animation. Fighters especially can't afford to lose any time before firing, but if any other aeon units besides aircraft were intended to follow this design of open/close, things could only get worse. Take anti-air guns as another example, if they were intended to be this way. There's a reason why they aim virtually instantly in every TA-based mod - aircraft following TA's conventions, including those in SupCom, are too fast to allow even a split second to pass before the flak is firing.
I am absolutely confident that one of the following would be true if open/close animations were in SupCom as a standard feature on all or even just some Aeon units:
1) Balance issues as a result of not being able to fire immediately or as a result of any of the other things mentioned in the post I will direct you to at the bottom of this post
2) The animations being removed by a mod, and that mod or that mod's feature of animation removal would become standard
3) The animation would look ridiculous, way too fast, and you'd be complaining about how stupid they look instead of how they don't exist at all, as you are now
Remember, everything in that post was off the top of my head, unverified, and I was generally "talking out of my ass"... this should be an easy one for you.
However, having now seen examples of units you'd like to see open/close, I have renewed confidence that these animations would harm gameplay, because of the time needed to perform a non-idiotic open/close animation. Fighters especially can't afford to lose any time before firing, but if any other aeon units besides aircraft were intended to follow this design of open/close, things could only get worse. Take anti-air guns as another example, if they were intended to be this way. There's a reason why they aim virtually instantly in every TA-based mod - aircraft following TA's conventions, including those in SupCom, are too fast to allow even a split second to pass before the flak is firing.
I am absolutely confident that one of the following would be true if open/close animations were in SupCom as a standard feature on all or even just some Aeon units:
1) Balance issues as a result of not being able to fire immediately or as a result of any of the other things mentioned in the post I will direct you to at the bottom of this post
2) The animations being removed by a mod, and that mod or that mod's feature of animation removal would become standard
3) The animation would look ridiculous, way too fast, and you'd be complaining about how stupid they look instead of how they don't exist at all, as you are now
Read the post on the last page where I demonstrate that this likely isn't practical from a gameplay perspective. Prove how they are practical by making a counter-argument. To make things easier, try searching for the phrase: "The post about why folding-unfolding" (no quotes)... that'll put you to the top of the post I made on the subject.now how can someone make the form/function deal work out to benifit gameplay? How about this they are FASTER when they are not open, meaning they reach the battle and take a slight decrease in speed when they reach, meaning they slow down a bit when they really need to use their weapons. They could also have an increased armor versus kinetic type weapons while closed up. Hell, even the tanks could take reduced damage from bombing when closed up.
Remember, everything in that post was off the top of my head, unverified, and I was generally "talking out of my ass"... this should be an easy one for you.
If animations are so useless why do the Ambusher, Toaster, Moho Exploiter, Viper, and Pack-o exist in TA mods then? or how about all those fancy animations on units...
seems like all those turned out fine even with their animations from my limited perspective as a player...
I could be wrong but if they weren't right i think we would see them changed drastically...
but again thats all from my limited view as a player.
oh and this thread turned out exactly how i thought it would plus or minus a few participants and subjects.
seems like all those turned out fine even with their animations from my limited perspective as a player...
I could be wrong but if they weren't right i think we would see them changed drastically...
but again thats all from my limited view as a player.
oh and this thread turned out exactly how i thought it would plus or minus a few participants and subjects.
-
BlackLiger
- Posts: 1371
- Joined: 05 Oct 2004, 21:58
The units you mention get an armour bonus when closed. Just like the solar array does.j5mello wrote:If animations are so useless why do the Ambusher, Toaster, Moho Exploiter, Viper, and Pack-o exist in TA mods then? or how about all those fancy animations on units...
seems like all those turned out fine even with their animations from my limited perspective as a player...
I could be wrong but if they weren't right i think we would see them changed drastically...
but again thats all from my limited view as a player.
oh and this thread turned out exactly how i thought it would plus or minus a few participants and subjects.
Thus, they are strong when closed, and weak but able to shoot when opened (at least the OTA/CC ones)
First, look at the concept art pictures posted above. You see that it's not some complicated transformation action, just some stuff sliding open. This could easily be set to happen instant or near instant without looking bad. Aircraft already move quickly so a quick animation is not going to look out of place or bad. And if they were competent enough they could simply make the unit ai to open it up slightly before getting in range, you could probably even make a quick script hack with dummy weapons in spring to do this. Or simply give aeon aircraft 10% more range, from superior alien technology.
So the delay to fire weapons is minor or even non existant. We could even leave it at this, the folding movements wouldn't be a problem if it's quick as hell. But say we want the folding to be more then just eye candy, maybe for realism, or better, interesting gameplay. Say the aeon aircraft is 10% faster while folded, and 10% slower when open, then other races aircraft. This isn't going to break balance by making AA unable to shoot them down. Even in TA there is around a 10% difference in freedom fighters and avengers speed withouth massive balance problems, if you want something to back that up.
Of course, it would be much more interesting if they did go trough with the making all/most the aeon units cloaking scheme they talked about in early previews. But I agree that this would indeed be a lot of trouble balancing, not impossible tough.
On realism in supcom and arguing about how the units need to be like this or that to work from a real life engineering point of view, are you aware that for example the monkeylord would sink into the ground from it's huge weight and small feet? Can you see why we don't give a #### about these facts?
So the delay to fire weapons is minor or even non existant. We could even leave it at this, the folding movements wouldn't be a problem if it's quick as hell. But say we want the folding to be more then just eye candy, maybe for realism, or better, interesting gameplay. Say the aeon aircraft is 10% faster while folded, and 10% slower when open, then other races aircraft. This isn't going to break balance by making AA unable to shoot them down. Even in TA there is around a 10% difference in freedom fighters and avengers speed withouth massive balance problems, if you want something to back that up.
Of course, it would be much more interesting if they did go trough with the making all/most the aeon units cloaking scheme they talked about in early previews. But I agree that this would indeed be a lot of trouble balancing, not impossible tough.
On realism in supcom and arguing about how the units need to be like this or that to work from a real life engineering point of view, are you aware that for example the monkeylord would sink into the ground from it's huge weight and small feet? Can you see why we don't give a #### about these facts?
as I said, easy to do, the aeon units COULD recieve an armored bonus, if this mechanic is bad, why did you not remove it from AA caydr?BlackLiger wrote: The units you mention get an armour bonus when closed. Just like the solar array does.
Thus, they are strong when closed, and weak but able to shoot when opened (at least the OTA/CC ones)
I believe there were mentions of stealthy aeon units in this thread. IRL stealth means you are practically invisible until you open your weapon bays. As such Aeon would get the first strike because their units won't be seen easily before they open and can already adjust their aim before an enemy notices them. But it sounds like the stealth got removed.
Balancing does not require completely identical units. You can have one faction that reacts slower and still balance it. Balancing by identity removes any point of having multiple factions in first place. There are ways to balance everything while still having unique features for each faction.
Balancing does not require completely identical units. You can have one faction that reacts slower and still balance it. Balancing by identity removes any point of having multiple factions in first place. There are ways to balance everything while still having unique features for each faction.
That sort of balancing is also favourable because the differences balance themselves whereas in the other setups the differences arent there and you have to statistically fiddle the two counter units to be of equal use. This constrains the differences between the factions and limits the game as a result.
no offense af, but balancing units isn't your area of expertise. Someone who is a professional game developer with that being their job has more time for balance. Again, as kdr said, what is the point of exceptionally similar units? Both sides would have one or two similar units that then begin to take a different direction, balancing them along the way.
This isn't rocket science and there is an art to balance but it also does allow for some interesting differences. Sure bland move and shoot units are easier to balance, they are also equally uninteresting to play with. Something you are going to begin to see in gundam is an increased difference between units of each faction. Differences which are not easy to balance. Accuracy, bursts of speed from thrusters, thrusters that make a unit fly up hill etc. If I had units that opened a weapon to fire... oh wait apsallus, which has a large charge up time then fires something akin to an ion cannon with linefire lasers..
We can do it in balance, now gundam, that is one developed in my spare time so it has taken longer, given the fact that I also have to devote time to art. Given a REAL development studio and just the job of balance and adding neat functionality.. that would be different. Frankly, in my eyes, as someone who is qualified to work in that job I think they were lazy on the balance and frankly were hoping that the zoom out large scale gimmick would sell the product. Now, I like the ladder setup they have and the whole opponent matchup is nice. I like many things about supcom but ultimately, I am biting into a tasty looking sandwich to find out the lettuce, tomato and meat all taste like fish, not different fish, no the same fish.
This isn't rocket science and there is an art to balance but it also does allow for some interesting differences. Sure bland move and shoot units are easier to balance, they are also equally uninteresting to play with. Something you are going to begin to see in gundam is an increased difference between units of each faction. Differences which are not easy to balance. Accuracy, bursts of speed from thrusters, thrusters that make a unit fly up hill etc. If I had units that opened a weapon to fire... oh wait apsallus, which has a large charge up time then fires something akin to an ion cannon with linefire lasers..
We can do it in balance, now gundam, that is one developed in my spare time so it has taken longer, given the fact that I also have to devote time to art. Given a REAL development studio and just the job of balance and adding neat functionality.. that would be different. Frankly, in my eyes, as someone who is qualified to work in that job I think they were lazy on the balance and frankly were hoping that the zoom out large scale gimmick would sell the product. Now, I like the ladder setup they have and the whole opponent matchup is nice. I like many things about supcom but ultimately, I am biting into a tasty looking sandwich to find out the lettuce, tomato and meat all taste like fish, not different fish, no the same fish.
I dont really know where this discussion is still heading, but I for one dislike supcom because the super units are all powerful. They took the metal maker concept and beefed it up with the building synergy and then basically made a game where its I tech to krogs.. I dont know how the game is in competitive play.. but from the limited play I had the superunits are so much better than even the lvl 3 units in supcom. They just dominate and on a largish map with the right production im sure you can hard tech and spam them. There is no strategy in supcom any more than I saw in DOW, TA, Starcraft..etc.. in otherwords there really wasnt strategy at all. It was again about the tactics.. you dont command an army and manuver and combine multiple groups in to complicated attacks using the terrain to the best addvantage.. nope in supcom you do what weve always done, mass an economy and spam certain units till the other guy dies.. and again micro is king. I wasnt expecting that.. I believed the hype and was expecting actual strategy in a RTS game for once.. the kind of strategy you only get in turn based games.. but nope nothing..
That is why I dont like Supcom it is same old same old, nothing new, nothing interesting cept for some cosmetic and interface doodads that really dont see much use because the balance is setup so they arent needed.
As for the folding unfolding.. Caydr has it occured to you that it is possible to be daring and go out there and have asymetrical balance.. you know it could be possible to give Aeon stealthed quicker aircraft that are fragile expecially when they are opened up and thus lose their speed and stealth.. this would actually add some variety.. yes it would be more complicated to balance.. but the more difficult something is the better the results when its finished.. complicated balance when achieved adds so much more to the gameplay.. Isnt this what people always rave about in regards to starcraft..
Supcom has 3 almost identical sides.. or can someone tell me what the difference between them is besides the superunits.. and of course they each have at least 1 stompy death super ground death fortress.. but hey.. I dont see any real interesting balance interplay amongst what looks like 3 sides even more similiar than ARM and CORE in terms of units
That is why I dont like Supcom it is same old same old, nothing new, nothing interesting cept for some cosmetic and interface doodads that really dont see much use because the balance is setup so they arent needed.
As for the folding unfolding.. Caydr has it occured to you that it is possible to be daring and go out there and have asymetrical balance.. you know it could be possible to give Aeon stealthed quicker aircraft that are fragile expecially when they are opened up and thus lose their speed and stealth.. this would actually add some variety.. yes it would be more complicated to balance.. but the more difficult something is the better the results when its finished.. complicated balance when achieved adds so much more to the gameplay.. Isnt this what people always rave about in regards to starcraft..
Supcom has 3 almost identical sides.. or can someone tell me what the difference between them is besides the superunits.. and of course they each have at least 1 stompy death super ground death fortress.. but hey.. I dont see any real interesting balance interplay amongst what looks like 3 sides even more similiar than ARM and CORE in terms of units
As a side note superunits kill eachother relatively easy, but 3 or 4 aeon strategic bombers will take out most ground based superunits in 1 attack run and most will survive.
But I agree with force balancing, I rarely ever build a lvl 1 or 2 army in supcom anymore, maybe aircraft and sea but land tier 1 is almost worthless.
But I agree with force balancing, I rarely ever build a lvl 1 or 2 army in supcom anymore, maybe aircraft and sea but land tier 1 is almost worthless.
i'd buy this expansion pack just to support Chris Taylor and the whole genre.
TA as a game, still has many things that a lot of other games lack. the whole scale of the old ta is something that caught me. the game could be decided on micro fights or at the end game macro-tasking.
Supcom follows this line, despite having IMO failed a bit as a ta II , the game is still superior to other RTS:es released. C&C3 is small, rock-paper-scissors game. and c&c3 is "the best thing" rts genre currently has to offer?
C&C3 "strategy":
anti-tank shoots down tanks
tanks shoot down infantry
infantry shoots down anti-tank
every infantry unit, except anti-tank squads are basically anti-infantry, eliminating the use of infantry.
aircraft is pretty
tbh, mammoth tanks are the only thing you will ever need
TA/TASPRING/SUPCOM strategy:
make a early rush and sacrifice econ growth early on.
the rush gets countered and the enemy starts to push your inferior-economy-powered army back.
chokepoint-defend and push the enemy back with stationary defence.
outmaneuver the turtling enemy with atlas/transport-drops and cripple his econ.
Which one would you like to see more in the near future? Or would you like seeing RTS:es at all?
TA as a game, still has many things that a lot of other games lack. the whole scale of the old ta is something that caught me. the game could be decided on micro fights or at the end game macro-tasking.
Supcom follows this line, despite having IMO failed a bit as a ta II , the game is still superior to other RTS:es released. C&C3 is small, rock-paper-scissors game. and c&c3 is "the best thing" rts genre currently has to offer?
C&C3 "strategy":
anti-tank shoots down tanks
tanks shoot down infantry
infantry shoots down anti-tank
every infantry unit, except anti-tank squads are basically anti-infantry, eliminating the use of infantry.
aircraft is pretty
tbh, mammoth tanks are the only thing you will ever need
TA/TASPRING/SUPCOM strategy:
make a early rush and sacrifice econ growth early on.
the rush gets countered and the enemy starts to push your inferior-economy-powered army back.
chokepoint-defend and push the enemy back with stationary defence.
outmaneuver the turtling enemy with atlas/transport-drops and cripple his econ.
Which one would you like to see more in the near future? Or would you like seeing RTS:es at all?
Personally, my insane plan is as follows.
1) ????
2) Profit
3) Duel Core
4) SupCom :D
Till then, I'll only play it at my friend who already has a duel core...but never uses it and insted plays his Crabbox 360. I'm like...why'd you BUY THE COMPUTER THEN! To start Word extra fast?
Madness, I say.
I too agree with Sleska.
1) ????
2) Profit
3) Duel Core
4) SupCom :D
Till then, I'll only play it at my friend who already has a duel core...but never uses it and insted plays his Crabbox 360. I'm like...why'd you BUY THE COMPUTER THEN! To start Word extra fast?
Madness, I say.
I too agree with Sleska.
yes but its not because of retarded special damages.
"why does the tank do 1-2 damage against riflemen?"
"well its because anti-tank-infantry counter tanks, and we dont want tanks to kill the anti-tank soldiers dont we?"
instead of:
"why does the riot tank own the flashes?"
"well its because the riot tank makes a huge blast that throws the flashes back, making them crash into the swarming flash behind them, creating a chain reaction"
i'd rather have more of the latter please
"why does the tank do 1-2 damage against riflemen?"
"well its because anti-tank-infantry counter tanks, and we dont want tanks to kill the anti-tank soldiers dont we?"
instead of:
"why does the riot tank own the flashes?"
"well its because the riot tank makes a huge blast that throws the flashes back, making them crash into the swarming flash behind them, creating a chain reaction"
i'd rather have more of the latter please
-
BlackLiger
- Posts: 1371
- Joined: 05 Oct 2004, 21:58
THIS IS NOT MADNESS! THIS IS SPRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINGGGGGGGG!Zoombie wrote:Personally, my insane plan is as follows.
1) Sell body on eBay
2) Profit
3) Duel Core
4) SupCom :D
Till then, I'll only play it at my friend who already has a duel core...but never uses it and insted plays his Crabbox 360. I'm like...why'd you BUY THE COMPUTER THEN! To start Word extra fast?
Madness, I say.
I too agree with Sleska.
Also, edited for great truth
