ORIGINAL: BigDuke66
What I mean? What do you mean by "'improvements' should be in quotes"
Changes that have been made in the past were not inarguably improvements. In the pre-Matrix era, AA shot down about as many planes as it historically did -- a bit high, but not bonkers. That was briefly 'improved' (someone 'fixed the error') producing loss rates that bore no relationship to historical reality. That was admittedly eventually rectified -- but at long as we're on the subject, at the moment we have no AA at all.
Supply units were altered so that they can no longer exert a decisive effect.
Changes were made so that 'sea roads' no longer work.
Hence 'improvements.' Many changes have been made. Granted, some of these changes were inadvertent -- but inarguably, not all were improvements.
"weighty financial considerations and the threat of industrial espionage"? ...I don't believe anything except an unreliable communication line between the guys(well anyone besides Ralph?) who work on it and the community leads to us standing in the dark on the state & aims of the current development...
Au Contraire. Curtis has argued that an NDA prevents him from discussing any changes that may be contemplated. I strongly suspect that if he inquired, he would find out that no one actually objects to him discussing contemplated changes.
Of course whoever owns the rights to TOAW doesn't want someone making the entire source code or whatever public knowledge. However, that's not what we're discussing here. Then too, TOAW's not exactly a hot intellectual property to begin with. That lends a definite note of absurdity to the whole 'we're bound by the NDA we signed' argument. Has Curtis asked if it would be okay to list the proposed changes?
